Skip to main content

Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Theory and Decision Library ((TDLU,volume 11))

Abstract

This paper describes three heuristics, or mental operations, that are employed in judgment under uncertainty. (i) An assessment of representativeness or similarity, which is usually performed when people are asked to judge the probability that an object or event A belongs to a class or process B. (ii) An assessment of the availability of instances or scenarios, which is often employed when people are asked to assess the frequency of a class or the plausibility of a particular development. (iii) An adjustment from a starting point, which is usually employed in numerical prediction when a relevant value is available. These heuristics are highly economical and usually effective, but they lead to systematic and predictable errors. A better understanding of these heuristics and of the biases to which they lead could improve judgments and decisions in situations of uncertainty.

This article was published with minor modifications, in Science 185 (1974), 1124–1131, 27 September 1974. Copyright 1974 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science whose permission to reproduce it here is gratefully acknowledged.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Notes

  1. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., ‘On the Psychology of Prediction’, Psychological Review 80 (1973), 237–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A., `Subjective Probability: A Judgment of Representativeness’, Cognitive Psychology 3 (1972), 430–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Edwards, W., `Conservatism in Human Information Processing’, in B. Kleinmuntz (ed.), Formal Representation of Human Judgment, Wiley, New York, 1968, pp. 17–52.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Slovic, P. and Lichtenstein, S., `Comparison of Bayesian and Regression Approaches to the Study of Information Processing in Judgment’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 6 (1971), 649–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., `The Belief in the Law of Small Numbers’, Psychological Bulletin 76 (1971), 105–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., `Availability: A Heuristic for Judging Frequency and Probability’, Cognitive Psychology 5 (1973), 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Galbraith, R. C. and Underwood, B. J., `Perceived Frequency of Concrete and Abstract Words’, Memory-ci Cognition 1 (1973), 56–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chapman, L J and Chapman, J. P., `Genesis of Popular but Erroneous Psycho-diagnostic Observations’, Journal of Abnormal Psychology 73 (1967), 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chapman, L. J. and Chapman, J. P., `Illusory Correlation as an Obstacle to the Use of Valid Psychodiagnostic Signs’, Journal of Abnormal Psychology 74 (1969), 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bar-Hillel, M., `Compounding Subjective Probabilities’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 9 (1973), 396–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen, J., Chesnick, E. I., and Haran, D., `A Confirmation of the Inertial-fit Effect in Sequential Choice and Decision’, British Journal of Psychology 63 (1972), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Alpert, M. and Raiffa, H., `A Report on the Training of Probability Assessors’, Unpublished manuscript, Harvard University, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  13. C. Staël von Holstein, `Two Techniques for Assessment of Subjective Probability Distributions–An Experimental Study’, Acta Psychologica 35 (1971), 478–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Winkler, R. L., `The Assessment of Prior Distributions in Bayesian Analysis’, Journal of the American Statistical Association 62 (1967), 776–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Savage, L. J., The Foundations of Statistics, Wiley, New York, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  16. de Finetti, B., `Probability: Interpretation’, in D. L. Sills (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences 13 (1968), 496–504.

    Google Scholar 

  17. This research was supported by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense and was monitored by ONR under Contract No. N00014–73-C-0438 to Oregon Research Institute. Additional support was provided by the Research and Development Authority of the Hebrew University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1975 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tversky, A., Kahneman, D. (1975). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. In: Wendt, D., Vlek, C. (eds) Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making. Theory and Decision Library, vol 11. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-1836-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1834-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics