Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
As both comments on our prior article in the present journal do not entail strong factual critique, we use our reply to clarify our intended reflections on useful definitions of "rationality" in judgment and decision research, which seems to be the focus of both comments. Granting that nominal definitions cannot be true or false, we argue that they can vary in scientific usefulness. Rather than using "rationality" as a synonym for well-defined terms like "accuracy," "maximal payoff," or "normative fit," the rule of succession (RoS) illustrates that it is useful to bind "rationality" to well-reasoned and systematic as opposed to shallow and haphazard inferences. "Well-reasoned" and "systematic" inferences, in turn, refer to rational agents who know when the RoS applies and when not, and whose adherence to the RoS is not overshadowed by interfering noise and biases.