Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-nqrmd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T10:59:41.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The cognitive economy: The probabilistic turn in psychology and human cognition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2013

Petko Kusev  and
Paul van Schaik
Petko Kusev
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Kingston University London, London KT1 2EE, United Kingdom. p.kusev@kingston.ac.uk http://kusev.co.uk City University, London EC1V OHB, United Kingdom
Paul van Schaik
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Teesside University, Middlesbrough TS1 3BA, United Kingdom. P.Van-Schaik@tees.ac.uk http://sss-studnet.tees.ac.uk/psychology/staff/Paul_vs/index.htm
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

According to the foundations of economic theory, agents have stable and coherent “global” preferences that guide their choices among alternatives. However, people are constrained by information-processing and memory limitations and hence have a propensity to avoid cognitive load. We propose that this in turn will encourage them to respond to “local” preferences and goals influenced by context and memory representations.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , June 2013 , pp. 294 - 295
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, J. R. (1990) The adaptive character of thought. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1991) The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review 98:409–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Busemeyer, J. R., Pothos, E. M., Franco, R. & Trueblood, J. S. (2011) A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors. Psychological Review 118(2):193–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busemeyer, J. R. & Wang, Z. (2007) Quantum information processing explanation for interactions between inferences and decisions. In: Quantum Interaction, AAAI Spring Symposium, Technical Report SS-07-08, ed. Bruza, P. D., Lawless, W., van Rijsbergen, K. & Sofge, D. A., pp. 91–97. AAAI Press Google Scholar
Busemeyer, J. R., Wang, Z. & Townsend, J. T. (2006) Quantum dynamics of human decision-making. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 50:220–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, C. R. & Levav, J. (2000) Familiarity bias and belief reversal in relative likelihood judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82:268–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusev, P., Ayton, P., van Schaik, P., Tsaneva-Atanasova, K., Stewart, N. & Chater, N. (2011) Judgments relative to patterns: How temporal sequence patterns affect judgments and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 37:1874–886.Google ScholarPubMed
Kusev, P., Tsaneva-Atanasova, K., van Schaik, P. & Chater, N. (2012a) Modelling judgement of sequentially presented categories using weighting and sampling without replacement. Behavior Research Methods. 44:1129–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kusev, P., van Schaik, P. & Aldrovandi, S. (2012b) Preferences induced by accessibility: Evidence from priming. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics 5:250–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kusev, P., van Schaik, P., Ayton, P., Dent, J. & Chater, N. (2009) Exaggerated risk: Prospect theory and probability weighting in risky choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35:1487–505.Google ScholarPubMed
Lichtenstein, S. & Slovic, P. (1971) Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 89:46–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lichtenstein, S. & Slovic, P. (1973) Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in Las Vegas. Journal of Experimental Psychology 101:16–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oaksford, M. & Chater, N. (2007) Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oaksford, M. & Chater, N. (2009) Pre'cis of Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32:69–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slovic, P. (1995) The construction of preferences. American Psychologist 50:364–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review 90(4): 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5:297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. & Koehler, D. J. (1994) Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review 101:547–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A. & Shafir, E. (1992) The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psychological Science 3:305–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. (1947) Theory of games and economic behavior (2nd ed.). Princeton University Press.Google Scholar