Representativeness Revisited

Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment.

Type

Book chapter

Intellectual base

Review or monograph

Year

2002

Pages cited

49-81

DOI

10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004

ISBN

9780521792608

DOI registrant

Cambridge University Press

Link

https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004

Cited from

philosophy

Cited by

4 citations across 4 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Relevance Substitution
  • In cognitive psychology, heuristic substitution names a mechanism in which an easy-to-assess attribute is substituted for the hard-to-assess attribute the decision actually requires, systematically and below conscious access.

    This sourceDefines attribute substitution: an easy-to-assess attribute substituted for the hard target attribute, below awareness.

Domain-specific

• Attribute Substitution
  • Attribute substitution (Kahneman and Frederick, 2002) is the dual-process account of a large family of intuitive judgment errors: when a person is asked to evaluate a target attribute that is difficult to assess directly, they unconsciously substitute a different, more accessible attribute and use that value as their answer, without registering the swap

    This sourceCoins attribute substitution as the dual-process account of intuitive judgment error: a hard target attribute unconsciously replaced by an accessible one and its value reported.

• Availability Heuristic
  • The proximate mechanism is attribute substitution (Kahneman and Frederick 2002)

    This sourceKahneman and Frederick's account of attribute substitution as the mechanism of intuitive heuristic judgment.

    Supported in partVerified against the source

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

• Scope Neglect
  • Kahneman and Frederick call this attribute substitution — a hard target attribute (scope-weighted value) is unconsciously replaced by an easier one (the prototype's affect), and the easy answer reported as if it answered the hard question

    SupportedVerified against the source

    Read by an automated reader; not a human review. How support was checked

Verification

Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.

Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 2 of 4 citations: 1 supported, 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:efcb93dd836e · see in the full table