An Interdisciplinary Re-Perspectivation of the Study of Heuristics, Biases, and Nudges

Till Neuhaus
{"title":"An Interdisciplinary Re-Perspectivation of the Study of Heuristics, Biases, and Nudges","authors":"Till Neuhaus","doi":"10.24819/netsol2023.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The following text starts with an assumption that current psychological research is primarily quantitative in nature and – despite its great contributions – misses out on the potentials lying in an interdisciplinary and thereby multi-methodological approach. To highlight these potentials, this text does three things: Primarily, it looks at the study of heuristics and biases, a much debated and researched field, to illustrate the pitfalls awaiting in a one-sided approach as the study of heuristics and biases has been mostly motivated by the inadequacies of the prior paradigm. Secondly, this text presents scholars from outside of mainstream thinking that have also discussed decision-making and – although in a more abstract form – and arrived at similar results. This, in result, highlights the potential of a historically minded interdisciplinary approach towards decision-making. Lastly, these insights are brought forward as valuable future research objects by further contextualizing them with current problems in decision-making science, these problems stem from the field of legal decision-making. The text overall raises awareness for alternative and interdisciplinary approaches towards psychological research questions.","PeriodicalId":368311,"journal":{"name":"NETSOL: New Trends in Social and Liberal Sciences","volume":"111 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NETSOL: New Trends in Social and Liberal Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24819/netsol2023.9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The following text starts with an assumption that current psychological research is primarily quantitative in nature and – despite its great contributions – misses out on the potentials lying in an interdisciplinary and thereby multi-methodological approach. To highlight these potentials, this text does three things: Primarily, it looks at the study of heuristics and biases, a much debated and researched field, to illustrate the pitfalls awaiting in a one-sided approach as the study of heuristics and biases has been mostly motivated by the inadequacies of the prior paradigm. Secondly, this text presents scholars from outside of mainstream thinking that have also discussed decision-making and – although in a more abstract form – and arrived at similar results. This, in result, highlights the potential of a historically minded interdisciplinary approach towards decision-making. Lastly, these insights are brought forward as valuable future research objects by further contextualizing them with current problems in decision-making science, these problems stem from the field of legal decision-making. The text overall raises awareness for alternative and interdisciplinary approaches towards psychological research questions.
对启发式、偏见和诱导研究的跨学科再观察
下面的文章从一个假设出发,即当前的心理学研究主要是定量研究,尽管做出了巨大贡献,但却忽略了跨学科、多方法研究的潜力。为了突出这些潜力,本文做了三件事:首先,它着眼于启发式和偏见的研究,这是一个备受争论和研究的领域,以说明片面方法所带来的隐患,因为启发式和偏见的研究主要是由先前范式的不足所激发的。其次,本文介绍了主流思想之外的学者,他们也曾讨论过决策问题,虽然形式更为抽象,但也得出了类似的结果。这就凸显了具有历史思维的跨学科决策方法的潜力。最后,通过进一步将这些见解与当前决策科学中的问题(这些问题源自法律决策领域)结合起来,将其作为有价值的未来研究对象。总体而言,该文提高了人们对心理学研究问题的替代性和跨学科方法的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信