Bayesian Rationality

Oaksford, Mike, Chater, Nick·2007·Oxford University Press eBooks

DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524496.001.0001

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524496.001.0001

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate
Evans, J. S. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691612460685 · Cited by 4,271
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory
Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10000968 · Cited by 2,254
Resource-rational analysis: Understanding human cognition as the optimal use of limited computational resources
Lieder, F., & Griffiths, T. L. (2020) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x1900061x · Cited by 892
MMBench: Is Your Multi-modal Model an All-Around Player?
Liu, Y., Duan, H., Zhang, Y., Li, B., Zhang, S., Zhao, W., Yuan, Y., Wang, J., He, C., Liu, Z., et al. (2025) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72658-3_13 · Cited by 668
Bayesian Fundamentalism or Enlightenment? On the explanatory status and theoretical contributions of Bayesian models of cognition
Jones, M., & Love, B. C. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10003134 · Cited by 533
Bayesian just-so stories in psychology and neuroscience.
Bowers, J. S., & Davis, C. J. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026450 · Cited by 436
Intuition and Reasoning: A Dual-Process Perspective
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2010) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1080/1047840x.2010.521057 · Cited by 385
Neural dynamics as sampling: a model for stochastic computation in recurrent networks of spiking neurons
Buesing, L., Bill, J., Nessler, B., & Maass, W. (2011) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002211 · Cited by 384
THE EVOLVING CONTEXT OF THE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE HYPOTHESIS
Bley-Vroman, R. (2009) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263109090275 · Cited by 335
Bayesian Computation Emerges in Generic Cortical Microcircuits through Spike-Timing-Dependent Plasticity
Nessler, B., Pfeiffer, M., Buesing, L., & Maass, W. (2013) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003037 · Cited by 281
Learning to argue: A study of four schools and their attempt to develop the use of argumentation as a common instructional practice and its impact on students
Osborne, J., Simon, S., Christodoulou, A., Howell‐Richardson, C., & Richardson, K. (2013) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.21073 · Cited by 268
The anchoring bias reflects rational use of cognitive resources
Lieder, F., Griffiths, T. L., M. Huys, Q. J., & Goodman, N. D. (2018) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1286-8 · Cited by 230
Quantum Cognition
Pothos, E. M., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2022) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-033020-123501 · Cited by 223
On the Distinction Between Rationality and Intelligence: Implications for Understanding Individual Differences in Reasoning
Stanovich, K. E. (2012) · The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199734689.013.0022 · Cited by 169
Large networks of rational agents form persistent echo chambers
Madsen, J. K., Bailey, R. M., & Pilditch, T. D. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-25558-7 · Cited by 66
A Ranking‐Theoretic Approach to Conditionals
Spohn, W. (2013) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12057 · Cited by 49
Meta-learned models of cognition
Binz, M., Dasgupta, I., Jagadish, A. K., Botvinick, M., Wang, J. X., & Schulz, E. (2024) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x23003266 · Cited by 38
Masters of suspicion: A Bayesian decision model of motivated political reasoning
Rigoli, F. (2021) · Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour · doi:10.1111/jtsb.12274 · Cited by 15
Young children distinguish the impossible from the merely improbable
Stahl, A. E., & Feigenson, L. (2024) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2411297121 · Cited by 10

Authors: Oaksford, M., & Chater, N.
Venue: Oxford University Press eBooks
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Published: 2007-02-22
DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524496.001.0001
OpenAlex: W4243073981
Cited by: 549
References: 0
FWCI: 10.04
Type: book
Language: en
Open access: closed

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