O papel das heurísticas no julgamento e na tomada de decisão sob incerteza

Autores

  • Leandro Miletto TONETTO Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul/Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing
  • Lisiane Lindenmeyer KALIL
  • Wilson Vieira MELO Faculdades de Taquara
  • Daniela Di Giorgio SCHNEIDER Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul/Centro Universitário Franciscano
  • Lilian Milnitsky STEIN Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul

Palavras-chave:

Heurísticas, Incerteza, Julgamento, Tomada de decisão

Resumo

Heurísticas são regras gerais de influência utilizadas pelo decisor para simplificar seus julgamentos em tarefas decisórias de incerteza. Com o intuito de entender as regras heurísticas no julgamento e na tomada de decisão, realiza-se uma revisão teórica, que prioriza as pesquisas de Tversky e Kahneman, englobando as heurísticas de ancoragem, disponibilidade e representatividade.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Referências

Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (1999). Anchoring, activation, and the construction of values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79 (2), 115153.

Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (2002). Incorporating the irrelevant: anchors in judgments of belief and value. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics & biases: the psychology of intuitive judgment (pp.121138). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Eysenck, M. W. (2001). Principles of cognitive psychology (2nd ed.). London: Psychology Press.

George, J. F., Duffy, K., & Ahuja, M. (2000). Countering the anchoring and adjustment bias with decision support systems. Decision Support Systems, 29 (2), 195206.

Guthrie, C., Rachlinski, J. J., & Wistrich, A. J. (2001). Inside the judicial mind. Cornell Law Review, 86 (4), 777830.

Hammond, K. (2000). Judgments under stress Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hastie, R. (2001). Problems for judgment and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 653683.

Hinsz, V. B., Kalnbach, L. R., & Lorentz, N. R. (1997). Using judgmental anchors to establish challenging selfset goals without jeopardizing commitment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71 (3), 287308.

Jimenez, S. B., & Rodriguez, B., G. (1996). Procesos psicologicos basicos Madrid: Editorial Universitas.

Kahneman, D. (1992). Reference points, anchors, norms and mixed feelings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 296312.

Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58 (9), 697720.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982a). The simulation heuristic. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A.Tversky. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases (pp.201208). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kahnemann, D., & Tversky, A. (1982b). Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases (pp.3347). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kahnemann, D., & Smith, V. (2002). Fundations of behavioral and experimental economics: Daniel Kahneman and Vernon Smith. The prize in economic sciences Acesso em abril 1, 2005, disponível em http://nobelprize.org/economics/laureates/2002/ecoadv02.pdf

Kerstholt, J. (1994). The effect of time pressure on decisionmaking behaviour in a dynamic task environment. Acta Psychologica, 86, 89104.

Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1971). Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 4655.

Marti, M. W., & Wissler, R. L. (2000). Be careful what you ask for: the effect of anchors on personal injury damages awards. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6 (2), 91103.

Martin, L. L., Seta, J. J., & Crelia, R. A. (1990). Assimilation and contrast as a function of people's willingness and ability to expend effort in forming an impression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (1), 2737.

Maule, J. A., & Hodgkinson, G. P. (2002). Heuristics, biases and strategic decision making. The Psychologist, 15 (2), 6871.

Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., & Cooke, A. D. J. (1998). Judgment and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 447477.

Mussweiler, T. (2002). The malleability of anchoring effects. Experimental Psychology, 49 (1), 6772.

Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2001). The semantics of anchoring. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86 (2), 234255.

Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1987). Experts, amateurs, and real estate: an anchoringandadjustment perspective on property pricing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 8497.

Plous, S. (1989). Thinking the unthinkable: The effects of anchoring on likelihood estimates of nuclear war. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 6791.

Plous, S. (1993). The psychology of judgment and decision making New York: McGrawHill.

Strack, F., & Mussweiler, T. (1997). Explaining the enigmatic anchoring effect: Mechanisms of selective accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73 (3), 437446.

Sunstein, C. R., Kahneman, D., & Schkade, D. (1998). Assessing punitive damages (with notes on cognition and valuation in law). The Yale Law Journal, 107 (7), 20712153.

Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995). Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review, 102 (2), 269283.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). Belief in the law of small numbers. Psychological Bulletin, 76 (2), 105110.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185 (4157), 11241131.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211 (4481), 453458.

Wegener, D. T., Petty, R. E., DetweilerBedell, B., & Jarvis, W. B. (2001). Implications of attitude change theories for numerical anchoring: anchor plausibility and the limits of anchor effectiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 6269.

Whyte, G., & Sebenius, J. K. (1997). The effect of multiple anchors on anchoring in individual and group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69 (1), 7585.

Williams, J. M. G., Watts, F. N., MacLeod, C., & Mathews, A. (1997). Cognitive Psychology and emotional disorders Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Wilson, T. D., Houston, C. E., Etling, K. M., & Brekke, N. (1996). A new look at anchoring effects: basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125 (4), 387402.

Wong, K. F. E., & Kwong, J. Y. (2000). Is 7300m equal to 7.3 km? Same semantics but different anchoring effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82 (2), 314333.

Downloads

Publicado

2006-06-30

Como Citar

TONETTO, L. M., KALIL, L. L. ., MELO, W. V. ., SCHNEIDER, D. D. G. ., & STEIN, L. M. . (2006). O papel das heurísticas no julgamento e na tomada de decisão sob incerteza. Estudos De Psicologia, 23(2). Recuperado de https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/estpsi/article/view/6791