A Case Study on Representativeness Heuristic in Employed and Unemployed Women in Turkey
Yıl 2022,
Cilt: 23 Sayı: 1, 67 - 92, 17.09.2022
Aysun Yerlikaya
,
Deniz Özyakışır
Öz
This study discusses whether decisions made under uncertain conditions are affected by the representativeness heuristic in terms of employed and unemployed women. For this purpose, we investigated whether female physicians and housewives use prior information when making predictions. The main purpose of study is to understand the disadvantaged position of women in the labor market. The study’s main contribution to the literature is to explore the effect of the representativeness heuristic on women’s deviations from rationality. To measure the representativeness heuristic, 14 questions were asked to 428 employed and unemployed women with an online survey. Our results were consistent with the literature, and we concluded that decisions made under uncertain conditions are influencedby the representativeness heuristic, resulting in deviations from rationality
Kaynakça
- Hazra, A. (2017). “Using the confidence interval confidently”, Journal of Thoracic Disease. 9(10): 4125-4130.
- Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1972). “Subjective Probability: A Judgment of Representativeness”. Cognitive Psychology. 3(3): 430-454.
- Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1973). “On the Psychology of Prediction”. Psychological Review. 8 (4): 237-251.
- Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow, London:AllenLane.
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2020). “Health Care Resources: Physiciansby Age and Gender”. https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=30172. Access: 25.05.2021.
- Simon, H. A. (1955). “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 69(1): 99-118.
- Tune, G. S. (1964). “Response Preferences: A Review of Some Relevant Literature”. Psychological Bulletin. 61(4), 286-302.
- Turkish Statistical Institute. (2020). “Reasons for Not Included in the Labor Force 2019/Women”. https://tuikweb.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1007. Access: 10.06.2021
- Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman. (1974). “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases”. Science. 185(4157): 1124-1131.
- Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman. (1983). “Extensional Versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment”. Psychological Review. 90(4): 293-315.
- Wagenaar, W. A. (1970).“Appreciation of conditional probabilities in binary sequences”, Acta Psychologica, 34(2-3): 348-356.
Yıl 2022,
Cilt: 23 Sayı: 1, 67 - 92, 17.09.2022
Aysun Yerlikaya
,
Deniz Özyakışır
Kaynakça
- Hazra, A. (2017). “Using the confidence interval confidently”, Journal of Thoracic Disease. 9(10): 4125-4130.
- Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1972). “Subjective Probability: A Judgment of Representativeness”. Cognitive Psychology. 3(3): 430-454.
- Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1973). “On the Psychology of Prediction”. Psychological Review. 8 (4): 237-251.
- Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow, London:AllenLane.
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2020). “Health Care Resources: Physiciansby Age and Gender”. https://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=30172. Access: 25.05.2021.
- Simon, H. A. (1955). “A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 69(1): 99-118.
- Tune, G. S. (1964). “Response Preferences: A Review of Some Relevant Literature”. Psychological Bulletin. 61(4), 286-302.
- Turkish Statistical Institute. (2020). “Reasons for Not Included in the Labor Force 2019/Women”. https://tuikweb.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1007. Access: 10.06.2021
- Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman. (1974). “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases”. Science. 185(4157): 1124-1131.
- Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman. (1983). “Extensional Versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment”. Psychological Review. 90(4): 293-315.
- Wagenaar, W. A. (1970).“Appreciation of conditional probabilities in binary sequences”, Acta Psychologica, 34(2-3): 348-356.