Skip to main content
Log in

Building the Theory of Ecological Rationality

  • Published:
Minds and Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

While theories of rationality and decision making typically adopt either a single-powertool perspective or a bag-of-tricks mentality, the research program of ecological rationality bridges these with a theoretically-driven account of when different heuristic decision mechanisms will work well. Here we described two ways to study how heuristics match their ecological setting: The bottom-up approach starts with psychologically plausible building blocks that are combined to create simple heuristics that fit specific environments. The top-down approach starts from the statistical problem facing the organism and a set of principles, such as the bias– variance tradeoff, that can explain when and why heuristics work in uncertain environments, and then shows how effective heuristics can be built by biasing and simplifying more complex models. We conclude with challenges these approaches face in developing a psychologically realistic perspective on human rationality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113(3), 628–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennis, W. M., Katsikopoulos, K. V., Goldstein, D. G., Dieckmann, A., & Berg, N. (2012). Designed to fit minds: Institutions and ecological rationality. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 409–427). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Berlin, I. (1953). The Hedgehog and the Fox: An essay on Tolstoy’s view of history. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges, B., Goldstein, D. G., Ortmann, A., & Gigerenzer, G. (1999). Can ignorance beat the stock market? In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group, Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 59–72). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Boyd, M. (2001). On ignorance, intuition, and investing: A bear market test of the recognition heuristic. Journal of Psychology and Financial Markets, 2, 150–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and evolutionary processes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (2005). The origin and evolution of cultures. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiman, L. (2001). Statistical modeling: The two cultures. Statistical Science, 16, 199–231.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Brighton, H., & Gigerenzer, G. (2012a). How heuristics handle uncertainty. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 33–60). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Brighton, H., & Gigerenzer, G. (2012b). Are rational actor models “rational” outside small worlds? In S. Okasha & K. Binmore (Eds.), Evolution and rationality: Decisions, co-operation and strategic behaviour (pp. 84–109). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brighton, H. J., & Olsson, H. (2009). Identifying the optimal response is not a necessary step toward explaining function. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 85–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bröder, A. (2012). The quest for take-the-best: Insights and outlooks from experimental research. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 216–240). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Buss, D. M. (2011). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1994). Origins of domain specificity: The evolution of functional organization. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 85–116). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Czerlinski, J., Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1999). How good are simple heuristics? In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group, Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 97–118). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Davey, G. (1989). Ecological learning theory. Florence, KY: Taylor & Frances/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMiguel, V., Garlappi, L., & Uppal, R. (2009). Optimal versus naive diversification: How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy? Review of Financial Studies, 22, 1915–1953.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dieckmann, A., & Rieskamp, J. (2007). The influence of information redundancy on probabilistic inferences. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1801–1813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fasolo, B., McClelland, G. H., & Todd, P. M. (2007). Escaping the tyranny of choice: When fewer attributes make choice easier. Marketing Theory, 7(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geisser, S. (1993). Predictive inference: An introduction. New York: Chapman and Hall.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Geman, S., Bienenstock, E., & Doursat, R. (1992). Neural networks and the bias/variance dilemma. Neural Computation, 4, 1–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Rationality for mortals: How people cope with uncertainty. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Brighton, H. (2009). Homo heuristicus: Why biased minds make better inferences. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 107–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., Dieckmann, A., & Gaissmaier, W. (2012). Efficient cognition through limited search. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 241–274). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103, 650–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1999). Betting on one good reason: The take the best heuristic. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group, Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 75–95). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (Eds.). (2001). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (1999). Fast and frugal heuristics: The adaptive toolbox. In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group, Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 3–34). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (2012). Ecological rationality: The normative study of heuristics. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 487–497). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., & The ABC Research Group. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Gilboa, I., Postlewaite, A., & Schmeidler, D. (2012). Rationality of belief or: Why Savage's axioms are neither necessary nor sufficient for rationality. Synthese, 187, 11–31.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, D. G., & Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Models of ecological rationality: The recognition heuristic. Psychological Review, 109, 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammerstein, P., & Stevens, J. R. (Eds.). (2012). Evolution and the mechanisms of decision making. Strüngmann Forum Reports. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U., & The ABC Research Group. (2013). Simple heuristics in a social world. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth, R. M. (2012). When simple is hard to accept. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 61–79). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Hogarth, R. M., & Karelaia, N. (2006). “Take-the-best” and other simple strategies: Why and when the work “well” with binary cues. Theory and Decision, 61, 205–249.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth, R. M., & Karelaia, N. (2007). Heuristic and linear models of judgment: Matching rules and environments. Psychological Review, 114, 733–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, J., Wilke, A., & Todd, P. M. (2008). Patch leaving in humans: Can a generalist adapt its rules to dispersal of items across patches? Animal Behaviour, 75(4), 1331–1349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, J. M. C., Fanselow, C., & Todd, P. M. (2012). Car parking as a game between simple heuristics. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 454–484). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katsikopoulos, K. V. (2011). Psychological heuristics for making decisions: Definition, performance, and the emerging theory and practice. Decision Analysis, 8, 10–29.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Katsikopoulos, K. V., & Martignon, L. (2006). Naive heuristics for paired comparisons: Some results on their relative accuracy. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 50, 488–494.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Sundie, J. M., Li, N. P., Li, Y. J., & Neuberg, S. L. (2009). Deep rationality: The evolutionary economics of decision-making. Social Cognition, 27, 764–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurzenhäuser, S., & Hoffrage, U. (2012). Designing risk communication in health. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 428–453). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Loewenstein, G., Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2007). Introduction: The hedgefox. In K. D. Vohs, R. F. Baumeister, & G. Loewenstein (Eds.), Do emotions help or hurt decision making? A Hedgefoxian perspective (pp. 3–9). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marewski, J. N., & Schooler, L. J. (2011). Cognitive Niches: An ecological model of strategy selection. Psychological Review, 118, 393–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martignon, L., & Hoffrage, U. (1999). Why does one reason decision making work? In G. Gigerenzer, P. M. Todd, & The ABC Research Group, Simple heuristics that make us smart (pp. 119–140). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • McKenzie, C. R. M., & Chase, V. M. (2012). Why rare things are precious: How rarity benefits inference. In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 309–334). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Miller, G. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pachur, T., Todd, P. M., Gigerenzer, G., Schooler, L. J., & Goldstein, D. G. (2012). When is the recognition heuristic an adaptive tool? In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 113–143). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Piattelli-Palmarini, M. (1996). Inevitable illusions: How mistakes of reason rule our minds. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieskamp, J., & Otto, P. E. (2006). SSL: A theory of how people learn to select strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 207–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rissanen, J. (2007). Information and complexity in statistical modeling. New York: Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Schooler, L. J., & Hertwig, R. (2005). How forgetting aids heuristic inference. Psychological Review, 112, 610–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shmueli, G. (2010). To explain or to predict? Statistical Science, 25(3), 289–310.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Silver, N. (2012). The signal and the noise: Why so many predictions fail—But some don’t. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1981). The sciences of the artificial (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1990). Invariants of human behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Şimşek, Ö. (2013). Linear decision rule as aspiration for simple decision heuristics. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 26, 2904–2912.

  • Tetlock, P. E. (2006). Expert political judgment: How good is it? How can we know?. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, P. M. (2001). Fast and frugal heuristics for environmentally bounded minds. In G. Gigerenzer & R. Selten (Eds.), Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox (pp. 51–70). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2007). Environments that make us smart: Ecological rationality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(3), 167–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2012). What is ecological rationality? In P. M. Todd, G. Gigerenzer, & The ABC Research Group, Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world (pp. 3–30). New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Todd, P. M., Gigerenzer, G., & The ABC Research Group. (2012a). Ecological rationality: Intelligence in the world. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Todd, P. M., Hills, T. T., & Robbins, T. W. (Eds.) (2012b). Cognitive search: Evolution, algorithms, and the brain. Strüngmann Forum Reports (vol. 9). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Tukey, J. W. (1962). The future of data analysis. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 33, 1–67.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilke, A., & Todd, P. M. (2012). Evolutionary foundations of decision making. In M. K. Dhami, A. Schlottmann, & M. Waldmann (Eds.), Origins of judgment and decision making (pp. 3–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter M. Todd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Todd, P.M., Brighton, H. Building the Theory of Ecological Rationality. Minds & Machines 26, 9–30 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-015-9371-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-015-9371-0

Keywords

Navigation