• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Nicholas Goodman

  •  Home
  •  Publications
    6
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates

 More details
  • All publications (6)
  •  16
    Empirical evidence for resource-rational anchoring and adjustment
    with F. Lieder, T. L. Griffiths, and Quentin Q. J.
    © 2017 Psychonomic Society, Inc.People’s estimates of numerical quantities are systematically biased towards their initial guess. This anchoring bias is usually interpreted as sign of human irrationality, but it has recently been suggested that the anchoring bias instead results from people’s rational use of their finite time and limited cognitive resources. If this were true, then adjustment should decrease with the relative cost of time. To test this hypothesis, we designed a new numerical est…Read more
    © 2017 Psychonomic Society, Inc.People’s estimates of numerical quantities are systematically biased towards their initial guess. This anchoring bias is usually interpreted as sign of human irrationality, but it has recently been suggested that the anchoring bias instead results from people’s rational use of their finite time and limited cognitive resources. If this were true, then adjustment should decrease with the relative cost of time. To test this hypothesis, we designed a new numerical estimation paradigm that controls people’s knowledge and varies the cost of time and error independently while allowing people to invest as much or as little time and effort into refining their estimate as they wish. Two experiments confirmed the prediction that adjustment decreases with time cost but increases with error cost regardless of whether the anchor was self-generated or provided. These results support the hypothesis that people rationally adapt their number of adjustments to achieve a near-optimal speed-accuracy tradeoff. This suggests that the anchoring bias might be a signature of the rational use of finite time and limited cognitive resources rather than a sign of human irrationality.
  •  125
    Lifestyles and allocation of health care resources
    Journal of Medical Ethics 20 (4): 271-271. 1994.
    Nelson GoodmanMedical Resource Allocation
  •  117
    Resource allocation: idealism, realism, pragmatism, openness
    Journal of Medical Ethics 17 (4): 179-180. 1991.
    Lewis and Charny have come under siege for suggesting remote questioning to decide appropriate medical care. While the criticisms are theoretically valid, the idea is so important practically that Lewis and Charny should be supported and their approach investigated as a way of making medical treatment at least more open and possibly more fair
    Nelson GoodmanMedical Resource AllocationHealth Care Justice
  •  103
    Not empirical, but observational or experimental
    Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (6): 549-549. 1999.
    Biomedical EthicsNelson Goodman
  •  94
    Obituary: John R. Myhill (1923–1987)
    with R. E. Vesley
    History and Philosophy of Logic 8 (2): 243-244. 1987.
    No abstract
    Logic and Philosophy of LogicNelson GoodmanLogic and Philosophy of Logic, Miscellaneous
  •  148
    Annual meeting of the Association for Symbolic Logic, New York City, December 1987
    with Harold T. Hodes, Carl G. Jockusch, and Kenneth McAloon
    Journal of Symbolic Logic 53 (4): 1287-1299. 1988.
    Logic and Philosophy of LogicLogic and Philosophy of Logic, MiscNelson Goodman
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback