Cited by 1,293Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsBayesian Modeling and Causal InferenceClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty

Cosmides, L·1996·Cognition

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0010-0277(95)00664-8

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Heuristics shaped by evolutionary pressures often perform remarkably well in natural settings despite their departure from statistical optimality.

    “These heuristics, shaped by evolutionary pressures, often perform remarkably well in natural settings despite their departure from statistical optimality (Cosmides and Tooby 1996; Gigerenzer and Goldstein 1996; Gigerenzer and Brighton 2009; Gigerenzer 2020; Marewski and Schooler 2011).”

    From The myth of the Bayesian brain (2025) · cites this paper as Cosmides and Tooby 1996

  • Natural selection tends to favor strategies that work well enough under real-world constraints, including limited time, energy, and computational capacity.

    “Natural selection tends to favor strategies that work well enough under real-world constraints, including limited time, energy, and computational capacity.”

    From The myth of the Bayesian brain (2025) · cites this paper as Cosmides and Tooby 1996

  • In these cases, participants are left to combine non-normalized sampled probability estimates for each hypothesis manually, and perhaps choose just one or combine them inappropriately.

    “participants are left to combine the non-normalized sampled probability estimates for each hypothesis 'manually', and perhaps choose just one of the probabilities or perhaps combine them inappropriately [52][53][54].”

    From Bayesian Brains without Probabilities (2016) · cites this paper as [52]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cosmides, L.
Affiliations
University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
Corresponding author
Cosmides, L
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-01
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
1-73
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2061173121
Cited by
1,293
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 60 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 44
FWCI
29.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Cognition (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
spectral representation, base rate neglect, Bayesian reasoning, judgment under uncertainty, heuristics and biases, ecological rationality, evolutionary psychology, overconfidence, conjunction fallacy, probability representation, inductive reasoning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review