Talk:Bounded rationality
| WikiProject Game theory | (Rated Stub-class, High-importance) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Is a system
is a system in which decisions are driven by the desire to identify and select the first acceptable alternative (satisficing).
I believe satisficing is a more specific term. Perhaps it should be mentioned, but I don't think the concept is synonymous with "bounded rationality"
- The term was coined by Prof. Herbert Simon in 1981.
Its use in Simon 1957 suggests otherwise. Are we even sure Simon coined the term at all?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.148.115.157 (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2002
[edit] Albert Einstein
He gives Albert Einstein as an example of bounded rationality. How is Einstein a better example of bounded rationality than, say, me? In fact, how can Einstein be an example of bounded rationality? He lived his live within the limitations of bounded rationality, but Einstein was not a concept. That Einstein sentence makes no sense.
- I agree, need an example.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.158.162.75 (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2006
[edit] References before See Also
Do references go before or after see also? The article looks a bit wierd. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Forwardmeasure (talk • contribs) 22:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC).
- See also goes before References read the instructions here: Wikipedia:Guide_to_layout#Standard_appendices_and_descriptions for more information.
Trade2tradewell 08:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bounded Emotionality
Yeah, I totally agree. I have no idea why it's even here. I think someone is trying to put in there personal say. I am going to remove it. If anyone has any objections please discuss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.65.64 (talk) 03:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
This seems to have snuck in here. It should be in it's own article not in this article as a section. Kevin Purcell (talk) 22:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Frankly this section is unreadable. I sincerely hope it's intended as a parody of feminism 90.214.138.35 (talk) 23:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hyperrationality
Why does "hyperrational" redirect here when the phrase "hyper" doesn't even occur in the article? 85.180.64.52 (talk)
[edit] Ariel Rubenstein
Note as written:
This puts the study of decision procedures on the research agenda.
This sentence draws my curiosity, but I don't fully understand .. is it clear?
Does it mean something like the following:
Rubenstein's way of approaching bounded rationality provides an model through which it can be researched empirically.
--Ihaveabutt (talk) 03:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Heuristics vs theoretical optima
The article says:
Gigerenzer ... and his colleagues have shown that such simple heuristics frequently lead to better decisions than the theoretically optimal procedure.
That's ridiculous. The "theoretically optimal procedure", by definition, leads to the best possible decision. At best, the heuristics can equal it, but they can never lead to _better_ decisions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.24.212 (talk) 16:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
