Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zkb6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T21:31:01.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The rationality debate: Look to ontogeny before phylogeny

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2001

Stephanie Stolarz-Fantino and
Edmund Fantino
Stephanie Stolarz-Fantino
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology-0109, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109 sfantino@psy.ucsd.edu efantino@ucsd.edu
Edmund Fantino
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology-0109, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0109 sfantino@psy.ucsd.edu efantino@ucsd.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Subjects have a rich history of decision making which would be expected to affect reasoning in new tasks. For example, averaging, a strategy that is effectively used in many decisions, may help explain the conjunction fallacy. Before resorting to accounts based on phylogeny, more parsimonious accounts in terms of ontogeny should be explored.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 23 , Issue 5 , October 2000, pp. 698
Copyright
© 2000 Cambridge University Press