Theories of truth as assessment criteria in judgment and decision making
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2009, Vol 4, Issue 2
Abstract
Hammond (1996) argued that much of the research in the field of judgment and decision making (JDM) can be categorized as focused on either coherence or correspondence (C&C) and that, in order to understand the findings of the field, one needs to understand the differences between these two criteria. Hammond’s claim is that conclusions about the competence of judgments and decisions will depend upon the selection of coherence or correspondence as the criterion (Hammond, 2008). First, I provide an overview of the terms coherence and correspondence (C&C) as philosophical theories of truth and relate them to the field of JDM. Second, I provide an example of Hammond’s claim by examining literature on base rate neglect. Third, I examine Hammond’s claim as it applies to the broader field of JDM. Fourth, I critique Hammond’s claim and suggest that refinements to the C&C distinction are needed. Specifically, the C&C distinction 1) is more accurately applied to criteria than to researchers, 2) should be refined to include two important types of coherence (inter and intrapersonal coherence) and 3) neglects the third philosophical theory of truth, pragmatism. Pragmatism, as a class of criteria in JDM, is defined as goal attainment. In order to provide the most complete assessment of human judgment possible, and understand different findings in the field of JDM, all three criteria should be considered.
Authors and Affiliations
Philip T. Dunwoody
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677666
- DOI -
- Views 174
- Downloads 0
Psychometric characteristics of two forms of the Slovak version of the Indecisiveness Scale
The study investigates the psychometric characteristics of the Slovak version of the original and short form of the Indecisiveness Scale on three samples of university students and one general population sample. An explo...
Strategies using recent feedback lead to matching or maximising behaviours
One challenge facing humans (and nonhuman animal) is that some options that appear attractive locally may not turn out best in the long run. To analyse this human learning problem, we explore human performance in a dynam...
Who lies? A large-scale reanalysis linking basic personality traits to unethical decision making
Previous research has established that higher levels of trait Honesty-Humility (HH) are associated with less dishonest behavior in cheating paradigms. However, only imprecise effect size estimates of this HH-cheating lin...
The Maximization Inventory
We present the Maximization Inventory, which consists of three separate scales: decision difficulty, alternative search, and satisficing. We show that the items of the Maximization Inventory have much better psychometric...
Precise models deserve precise measures: A methodological dissection
The recognition heuristic (RH) — which predicts non-compensatory reliance on recognition in comparative judgments — has attracted much research and some disagreement, at times. Most studies have dealt with whether or und...