Chapter 12. Correspondence and Coherence: Indicators of Good Judgment in World Politics

  1. Dr David Hardman2 and
  2. Professor Laura Macchi3
  1. Professor Philip E. Tetlock

Published Online: 28 JAN 2005

DOI: 10.1002/047001332X.ch12

Thinking: Psychological Perspectives on Reasoning, Judgment and Decision Making

Thinking: Psychological Perspectives on Reasoning, Judgment and Decision Making

How to Cite

Tetlock, P. E. (2003) Correspondence and Coherence: Indicators of Good Judgment in World Politics, in Thinking: Psychological Perspectives on Reasoning, Judgment and Decision Making (eds D. Hardman and L. Macchi), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. doi: 10.1002/047001332X.ch12

Editor Information

  1. 2

    Department of Psychology, London Metropolitan University, Calcutta House, Old Castle Street, London E1 7NT, UK

  2. 3

    Facoltà e Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Piazza dell'Ateneo Nuovo, 1, 20126 Milan, Italy

Author Information

  1. Hass School of Business, University of California, Berkeley, CA94720-1900, USA

Publication History

  1. Published Online: 28 JAN 2005
  2. Published Print: 16 SEP 2003

ISBN Information

Print ISBN: 9780471494577

Online ISBN: 9780470013328

SEARCH

Keywords:

  • expert political judgment;
  • cognitive conservatism;
  • incoherence and violations of extensionality

Summary

This chapter contains sections titled:

  • Methodological Background

  • Bias No. 1: Overconfidence

  • Bias No. 2: Cognitive Conservatism

  • Bias No. 3: Hindsight Bias

  • Bias No. 4: Theory-driven Standards of Evidence and Proof

  • Bias No. 5: Incoherence and Violations of Extensionality

  • Some Closing Observations

  • References