Summary

In Bayesian cognitive science, the mind is seen as a spectacular probabilistic-inference machine. But judgment and decision-making (JDM) researchers have spent half a century uncovering how dramatically and systematically people depart from rational norms. In this article, we outline recent research that opens up the possibility of an unexpected reconciliation. The key hypothesis is that the brain neither represents nor calculates with probabilities but approximates probabilistic calculations by drawing samples from memory or mental simulation. Sampling models diverge from perfect probabilistic calculations in ways that capture many classic JDM findings, which offers the hope of an integrated explanation of classic heuristics and biases, including availability, representativeness, and anchoring and adjustment.

Details: Current Directions in Psychological Science. October 2020

Authors:   Nick Chater, Jian-Qiao Zhu, Jake Spicer, Joakim Sundh, Pablo León-Villagrá, Adam Sanborn

 A copy of the Working Paper, published by the University of Warwick is also available online (PDF).