Bennis, Medin, and Bartels (2010, this issue) correctly identify real limits to the efficacy of cost-benefit analysis in comparison to moral rules. In this commentary, I suggest that those very same limits apply to decision making in general. Cost-benefit analysis may be the best way to arrive at decisions under a set of “closed-world assumptions” like those described by Bennis et al. But those assumptions virtually never hold, and in the absence of those assumptions, cost-benefit analysis often substitutes counting for thinking.
BaronJ. (1986). Tradeoffs among reasons for action. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 16, 173–195.
2.
BaronJ.SprancaM. (1997). Protected values. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 1–16.
3.
Ben-HaimY. (2006). Info-gap decision theory: Decisions under severe uncertainty. 2nd ed.London: Academic Press.
4.
Ben-HaimY.DacsoC.SchwartzB. (2009). What makes a good decision? Robust satisficing as a normative standard of rational decision making. Manuscript submitted for publication.
5.
BennisW.M.MedinD.L.BartelsD.M. (2010). The costs and benefits of calculation and moral rules. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 187–202.
6.
FiskeA.P.TetlockP.E. (1997). Taboo trade-offs: Reactions to transactions that transgress the spheres of justice. Political Psychology, 18, 255–297.
7.
GilliganC. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8.
HareR.M. (1981). Moral thinking: Its levels, method, and point. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
9.
KeysD.J.SchwartzB. (2007). “Leaky” rationality: How research on behavioral decision making challenges normative standards of rationality. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 162–180.
10.
KohlbergL. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive developmental approach to socialization. In GoslinD.A. (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory (pp. 347–480). Chicago: Rand McNally.
11.
PollanM. (2002, March 31). Power steer. New York Times Magazine, 44–51, 68, 71–72, 76–77.
12.
RitovI.BaronJ. (1999). Protected values and omission bias. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 79, 79–94.
13.
RuarkR. (1953). Something of value. New York: Random House.
14.
SchwartzB. (1986). The battle for human nature. New York: Norton.
15.
SchwartzB. (1988). Some disutilities of utility. Journal of Thought, 23, 132–147.
16.
SchwartzB. (1994). The costs of living. New York: Norton.
17.
SchwartzB. (2004). The paradox of choice. New York: Ecco.
SimonH.A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–118.
20.
SimonH.A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.
21.
SimonH.A. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. New York: Wiley.
22.
TetlockP.E.KristelO.V.ElsonS.B.GreenM.C.LernerJ.S. (2000). The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 853–870.
23.
ThalerR. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 39–60.
