Perceptions of Catastrophic Climate Risks

Many climate change-related risks, such as more frequent and severe natural disasters, can be characterised as low-probability/high-consequence (LP/HC) events. Perceptions of LP/HC risks are often associated with biases which hamper taking action to limit these risks, such as underestimation of risk, myopia, and the adoption of simplified decision heuristics. This chapter discusses these biases and outlines key elements of policies to overcome them in order to enhance climate action.

Hard Examples for Common Variable Decision Heuristics

The CDCL algorithm for SAT is equivalent to the resolution proof system under a few assumptions, one of them being an optimal non-deterministic procedure for choosing the next variable to branch on. In practice this task is left to a variable decision heuristic, and since the so-called VSIDS decision heuristic is considered an integral part of CDCL, whether CDCL with a VSIDS-like heuristic is also equivalent to resolution remained a significant open question.We give a negative answer by building a family of formulas that have resolution proofs of polynomial size but require exponential time to decide in CDCL with common heuristics such as VMTF, CHB, and certain implementations of VSIDS and LRB.

Poder, incerteza e heurísticas: contribuições da psicologia cognitiva para o estudo da tomada de decisões nas Relações Internacionais

A falta de consenso sobre uma definição de poder e sobre como lidar com a incerteza nas Relações Internacionais são problemas antigos nessa disciplina. Este artigo apresenta algumas contribuições da psicologia cognitiva relacionadas ao uso de heurísticas decisórias para as discussões acerca do conceito de poder e relacionadas à incerteza no campo das Relações Internacionais. Para tanto, realiza-se uma revisão das visões divergentes acerca do conceito do poder e da incerteza entre os três paradigmas mais influentes nas Relações Internacionais, apresentando como cada um deles define esses dois conceitos e quais as implicações teóricas dessas visões. Apesar de várias definições operacionais, é possível que o conceito formal de poder apresentado por Dahl (1957) seja utilizado como referência para as quatro faces do poder apresentadas. No entanto, essa definição implica necessariamente algum grau de incerteza nas relações de poder, relacionadas à informação, seja pela sua disponibilidade, pela sua confiabilidade, pela ambiguidade ou pela sua subjetividade. Sendo assim, apresenta-se as heurísticas decisórias como forma de lidar com a tomada de decisão em situações de incerteza envolvendo relações de poder, a partir de uma racionalidade circunscrita e ecológica. Essa abordagem é uma, dentre várias possíveis, e não busca impor termos absolutos para a discussão, nem negar as várias contribuições teóricas feitas pelas demais abordagens discutidas, mas sim destacar alguns pontos negligenciados e apresentar novas possibilidades de análise no campo das Relações Internacionais. Abstract: The lack of agreement about a definition of power and how to deal with uncertainty in the International Relations are long known problems of the discipline. This article presents some contributions from cognitive psychology related to the use of decision heuristics to the discussions about the concept of power and related to uncertainty in the field of International Relations. For this, it revises the different visions about the concept of power and uncertainty among the three most influential paradigms in International Relations, presenting how each one of them defines these two concepts and what are the theoretical implications for these visions. Despite the many operational definitions, it is possible that the formal concept provided by Dahl (1957) be taken as a reference for the four faces of power presented here. Nonetheless, this definition necessarily embeds some degree of uncertainty in power relations as a matter of information, be it because of its availability, its reliability, its ambiguity or its subjectivity. In this sense, decision heuristics are presented as a way to deal with decision-making under uncertainty related to power relationships, from a bounded and ecological rationality perspective. This approach is just one, among many, and does not seek to impose absolute terms to the discussion, nor denies the many theoretical contributions made by the other approaches discussed here, but points out new possibilities for analysis and shed light to neglected terms for debate in the field of International Relations. Keywords: Power; Uncertainty; Decision-Making; Bounded Rationality; International Relations Theories. Recebido em: outubro/2018. Aprovado em: junho/2019.

The Ecological Rationality of Situations

The study of situations involves asking how people behave in particular environmental settings, often in terms of their individual personality differences. The ecological rationality research program explains people’s behavior in terms of the specific decision-making tools they select and use from their mind’s adaptive toolbox when faced with specific types of environment structure. These two approaches can be integrated to provide a more precise mapping from features of situation structure to decision heuristics used and behavioral outcomes. This chapter presents three examples illustrating research on ecological rationality and its foundations, along with initial directions for incorporating it into an integrated situation theory.