Skip to main content

A Note on the Passing of Dr. Daniel Kahneman


This week I’d like to note the passing of psychology researcher, Princeton professor, and Nobel laureate in Dr. Daniel Kahneman on March 27, at the age of 90. Dr. Kahneman won the 2002 Nobel Prize in economics (there is no Nobel prize in psychology) for essentially inventing the field of behavioral economics with his colleague Amos Tversky. Kahneman writes that his interest in understanding people grew out of childhood experiences as a Jewish boy in Nazi-occupied France, for instance when a German SS soldier treated him well simply because he was wearing his sweater (with its identifying Star of David) inside-out. As his Nobel acceptance speech, Dr. Kahneman wrote a short treatise about the functioning of the narrative and intuitive minds, which he described as providing the underlying basis for his groundbreaking behavioral economics findings. He later expanded that speech to a book-length treatment titled Thinking, Fast and Slow, which popularized cognitive neuroscience.

Kahneman's work provided one of the most important underpinnings of my own Two Minds Theory. If you look at the table on this page showing differences between the Narrative and Intuitive minds, you can see that only the bottom two items in each column are original ideas. I want to acknowledge here that my theory is essentially a refinement or elaboration of Kahneman's, rather than a new theory on its own. In my initial theory paper, I started by using Kahneman's own terms for the two minds, System 1 and System 2, only changing them because the editor of the journal Nursing Research didn't feel they were adequately descriptive. I have acknowledged this intellectual debt even while arguing that my version of Two Minds Theory might provide a simpler explanation for some phenomena than the lists of heuristics and biases that are common in behavioral economics circles. Many other behavioral-economic scholars, including 2017 Nobel laureate Richard Thaler who co-wrote the book Nudge, owe a great debt to Kahneman's ideas. As Sir Isaac Newton said, we see furthest when we stand on the shoulders of giants. 

I must also say a word about Dr. Kahneman's final book, Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment, which can be read as an argument to turn many areas of human decision-making over to more logical and consistent algorithmic approaches, such as those provided by artificial intelligence. I have critiqued that view, and raised other concerns about recent developments in generative AI. (For the record, Noise was published in May 2021, a full year before the AI revolution popularized by ChatGPT). Kahneman's argument in Noise flows straightforwardly from his earlier ideas about the supremacy of Narrative over Intuitive modes of thought. If slow and logical Narrative thinking is always better, and fallible humans are not biologically equipped to do this type of thinking consistently, should we not make the logical decision to hand over our decisions to a different type of thinker without our human flaws? My counter-argument is that the best human decision-making actually relies on the Intuitive system as well as the Narrative mind. The combination of our two minds is what allows humanity to be at our wisest, for instance in the realms of legal judgments or scientific conclusions. Algorithms therefore may be a useful adjunct to human decision-making, but they can never replace it. Kahneman himself noted the limitations of his last work: 

I view the book as premature in a way. I started thinking about noise six or seven years ago and now a book is coming out. That, in principle, is too soon. That is, when you have a relatively big idea, you know, 20 years is a better time frame than six. I started when I was in my 80s, so I just didn’t have the luxury. There are fascinating questions, like the one you raised of noise in a cross-cultural context, that I would have loved to explore and in 20 years, I would have gotten to it, I and my collaborators. In six years, this is what we managed to accomplish.

Sadly, he was correct. But insights from Kahneman's propect theory, his new field of behavioral economics, and his ideas about algorithms will continue to be important influences on many people's work, including my own, as we explore new understandings of decisions and behavior.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Prototypes and Willingness: The Theory of Planned Behavior Revisited

  You may recall my blog post from last year on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) , titled "in praise of a failed model." My evaluation of this model was that it accurately describes the Narrative Mind, which does control intentions. But the ultimate goal of the TPB is to predict behavior, and the relationship between intentions and behavior is weak at best -- in fact, it is entirely attributable to the fact that when someone says they don't intend to do something, they probably won't do it. When they say they do intend to do it, their actual results are no better than chance, a result of the intention-behavior gap as described in Two Minds Theory.  The full TPB is shown in this diagram: Cognitive constructs like attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (i.e., self-efficacy) are Narrative-system phenomena, and they do indeed have relationships with each other and with intentions (which are also products of the Narrative Mind). Perceived behavi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Leventhal's Common-Sense Model and Two Minds Theory

Leventhal, Diefenbach, and Leventhal's (1992) "common sense model" of self-regulation. My 2018 paper describing Two Minds Theory (TMT) cites work by my colleague and coauthor Dr. Paula Meek, who conducted studies of patients experiencing the symptom of breathlessness due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD). Paula's research used a model by Howard and Elaine Leventhal (with Michael Diefenbach) that was an early iteration of the dual-process approach also used in TMT. She found that people who focused their attention on different aspects of the feeling of breathlessness then in turn had different interpretations of what that symptom meant for them, and that those interpretations changed their perception of the symptom's intensity. This example illustrates a back-and-forth between perceptions and thoughts, which is characteristic of Leventhal's model. Leventhal's dual-process model, sometimes called the "common sense model" of self-reg...
Post a Comment
Read more

Intuitive Decision-Making by People with Diabetes

People with diabetes often find it challenging to maintain their blood sugar levels, in part because diabetes is a complicated disease. When the kidneys don't produce enough insulin fast enough to adjust for changes in digestion or activity, blood sugar can fluctuate rapidly, even over the course of a single day. To manage this, people with diabetes often need to make changes in multiple areas: adopting a low-carbohydrate diet, managing the timing and amount of exercise they get, keeping track of the times when their blood sugar rises and falls, potentially giving themselves a dose of insulin around mealtimes, managing stress, and other preventive measures as well.  But despite all of this complexity, the people who manage their diabetes most successfully are often the least  obsessive about the fine details. When my Dad was first diagnosed with diabetes, he checked his blood sugar often (using finger sticks; continuous glucose monitoring [CGM] devices weren’t yet a thing). Bu...
Post a Comment
Read more