The recognition heuristic: A decade of research
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2011, Vol 6, Issue 1
Abstract
The recognition heuristic exploits the basic psychological capacity for recognition in order to make inferences about unknown quantities in the world. In this article, we review and clarify issues that emerged from our initial work (Goldstein & Gigerenzer, 1999, 2002), including the distinction between a recognition and an evaluation process. There is now considerable evidence that (i) the recognition heuristic predicts the inferences of a substantial proportion of individuals consistently, even in the presence of one or more contradicting cues, (ii) people are adaptive decision makers in that accordance increases with larger recognition validity and decreases in situations when the validity is low or wholly indeterminable, and (iii) in the presence of contradicting cues, some individuals appear to select different strategies. Little is known about these individual differences, or how to precisely model the alternative strategies. Although some researchers have attributed judgments inconsistent with the use of the recognition heuristic to compensatory processing, little research on such compensatory models has been reported. We discuss extensions of the recognition model, open questions, unanticipated results, and the surprising predictive power of recognition in forecasting.
Authors and Affiliations
Gerd Gigerenzer and Daniel G. Goldstein
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677782
- DOI -
- Views 147
- Downloads 0
The effect of dynamic proximity cues on counterfactual plausibility
Previous research has found that people consult closeness or proximity cues when they evaluate the plausibility or likelihood of a counterfactual alternative to reality. In this paper we asked whether the plausibility of...
Pill or bill? Influence of monetary incentives on the perceived riskiness and the ethical approval of clinical trials
In clinical trials, incentivizing human research subjects with large amounts of money is often considered unethical, as it may coerce people to participate. This argument implies that people perceive rewards (i.e., incen...
Downside financial risk is misunderstood
The mathematics of downside financial risk can be difficult to understand: For example a 50% loss requires a subsequent 100% gain to break-even. A given percentage loss always requires a greater percentage gain to break-...
The value of a smile: Facial expression affects ultimatum-game responses
Abstract: In social interaction, the facial expression of an opponent contains information that may influence the interaction. We asked whether facial expression affects decision-making in the ultimatum game. In this two...
How decision context changes the balance between cost and benefit increasing charitable donations
Recent research on charitable donations shows that donors evaluate both the impact of helping and its cost. We asked whether these evaluations were affected by the context of alternative charitable causes. We found that...