Cited by 31Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Mycological rationality: Heuristics, perception and decision-making in mushroom foraging

Open access
Kaaronen, Roope O.·2020·Judgment and Decision Making

Abstract

How do mushroom foragers make safe and efficient decisions under uncertainty, or deal with the genuine risks of misidentification and poisoning? This article is an inquiry into ecological rationality, heuristics, perception, and decision-making in mushroom foraging. By surveying 894 Finnish mushroom foragers, this article illustrates how socially learned rules of thumb and heuristics are used in mushroom foraging, and how simple heuristics are often complemented by more complex and intuitive decision-making. The results illustrate how traditional foraging cultures have evolved precautionary heuristics to deal with uncertainties and poisonous species, and how foragers develop selective attention through experience. The study invites us to consider whether other human foraging cultures might use heuristics similarly, how and why such traditions have culturally evolved, and whether early hunter-gatherers might have used simple heuristics to deal with uncertainty.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1930297500007841

Cites

2 of 2 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?

  • Mushroom picking is part of the culture/cultural heritage in many European countries.

    “While mushroom picking may not be prominent in all cultures, it is an integral part of cultural heritage in many European countries.”
  • The decision of whether to pick a mushroom or leave it is typically fast, made within seconds or minutes, and characterized as 'fast and frugal' based on simple rules, such as avoiding spotted mushrooms.

    “In contrast, the decision of whether to pick a mushroom or leave it is typically fast and made within seconds or minutes and is characterized as 'fast and frugal' based on simple rules, such as avoiding spotted mushrooms (Kaaronen, 2020).”

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaaronen, R. O.
Affiliations
University of Helsinki (FI)
Corresponding author
Kaaronen, Roope O.
Venue
Judgment and Decision Making
Published
2020-09
Volume
15
Issue
5
Pages
630-647
ISSN
1930-2975 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4313429107
Cited by
31
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3
FWCI
2.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Judgment and Decision Making (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
mushroom foraging, heuristics, ecological rationality, decision making under uncertainty, selective attention, poisonous mushrooms, misidentification, hunter-gatherers, perception

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