Context laden decision problems:

a criticism of Kahneman & Tversky, but a strength of evolutionary psychologists --

Why?

Kahneman & Tversky don=t explain why their results occur in particular context.

For evolutionary psychologists, this is one of the main goals of their work:

Functionalist approach -- WHY would this mechanism be adaptive?

Notes of caution about Evolutionary Psychology:

1) Do theorists have the RIGHT explanations?

2) Choices are influenced by learning and culture, and not just genetics

Tversky & Kahneman -

overemphasis on our lack of decision making tool usage (e.g., Bayes= theorem, maximum utility equations, considering the opposite) in contexts in which it may not be essential.

Evolutionary psychologists (e.g., Buss, Gigerenzer) -

underemphasis on our ability to learn to use these tools in contexts in which they might be useful.

Individual WRONG decisions amid basically RIGHT general strategies

Good enough decisions are fine much of the time, and probably most effective use of resources.

(satisficing)

Lopes= letter Ar@ example:

Ar@ is more common as 3rd letter than 1st, but more consonants (12/20) are more common as 1st letter, so using availability heuristic yields correct answer 12 out of 20 times.

Why do we study errors?

- insight into how we process information

- so we can correct them