Social functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice: Intuitive politicians, theologians, and prosecutors.
Abstract
Research on judgment and choice has been dominated by functionalist assumptions that depict people as either intuitive scientists animated by epistemic goals or intuitive economists animated by utilitarian ones. This article identifies 3 alternative social functionalist starting points for inquiry: people as pragmatic politicians trying to cope with accountability demands from key constituencies in their lives, principled theologians trying to protect sacred values from secular encroachments, and prudent prosecutors trying to enforce social norms. Each functionalist framework stimulates middle-range theories that specify (a) cognitive-affective-behavioral strategies of coping with adaptive challenges and (b) the implications of these coping strategies for identifying empirical and normative boundary conditions on judgmental tendencies classified as errors or biases within the dominant research programs.
Cites (20)
- The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.Baumeister, Roy F., Leary, Mark R. · 1995 · Psychological Bulletin
- The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.Haidt, Jonathan · 2001 · Psychological Review
- Status quo bias in decision makingSamuelson, William, Zeckhauser, Richard · 1988 · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
- Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research ProgrammesLakatos, I. · 1970 · Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge
- A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structureMischel, Walter, Shoda, Yuichi · 1995 · Psychological Review
- How the mind worksPINKER, STEVEN · 1999 · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
- The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the SelfSteele, Claude M. · 1988 · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology
- Mood and judgment: The affect infusion model (AIM).Forgas, Joseph P. · 1995 · Psychological Bulletin
- Accounting for the effects of accountability.Lerner, Jennifer S., Tetlock, Philip E. · 1999 · Psychological Bulletin
- Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”Kruglanski, Arie W., Webster, Donna M. · 1996 · Psychological Review
Cited by (23)
- Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives.van Zomeren, Martijn, Postmes, Tom, Spears, Russell · 2008 · Psychological Bulletin
- The Psychology of Conspiracy TheoriesDouglas, Karen M., Sutton, Robbie M., Cichocka, Aleksandra · 2017 · Current Directions in Psychological Science
- A theory of blameMalle, Bertram F., Guglielmo, Steve, Monroe, Andrew E. · 2014 · Psychological Inquiry
- Bayesian Fundamentalism or Enlightenment? On the explanatory status and theoretical contributions of Bayesian models of cognitionJones, Matt, Love, Bradley C. · 2011 · Behavioral and Brain Sciences
- Principled moral sentiment and the flexibility of moral judgment and decision makingBartels, Daniel M. · 2008 · Cognition
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice: Intuitive politicians, theologians, and prosecutors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037//0033-295x.109.3.451
- The paper
- Tetlock, P. E. (2002). Social functionalist frameworks for judgment and choice: Intuitive politicians, theologians, and prosecutors. Psychological Review. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.109.3.451
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.