Human Rationality

This article provides a critical overview of research on human rationality. Rationality research poses a number of unusual challenges to psychologists. For one, it is unusually interdisciplinary and involves research conducted in adjacent disciplines (e.g., economics, education, communication, computer science and philosophy), not all of which are accessible with psychological training. What underlies this diversity, however, is an arguably even more unusual feature: the fact that even purely descriptive research, focused on what we actually do, cannot proceed without reference to normative considerations, that is, considerations of what we ought to do. Empirical results can thus be understood only with some understanding of the relevant norms of rationality. This article introduces the range of relevant frameworks, followed by examples of the different ways these frameworks are put to use. The bulk of the article then surveys research findings on human rationality across the core areas of (probability) judgment, reasoning, decision-making, and argumentation. Two final sections provide cross-cutting themes, one on the contrast (and interrelationship) between individual and collective rationality and one on the unique challenges of linking rationality research to real-world concerns.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Annual Review of Psychology
Published
2025-10-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020425-020958
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Classical Philosophy and Thought
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
17.27
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Human Rationality

Ulrike Hahn
1 citations
Annual Review of Psychology
Classical Philosophy and Thought
17.27
article

Human Rationality

Ulrike Hahn
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This article provides a critical overview of research on human rationality. Rationality research poses a number of unusual challenges to psychologists. For one, it is unusually interdisciplinary and involves research conducted in adjacent disciplines (e.g., economics, education, communication, computer science and philosophy), not all of which are accessible with psychological training. What underlies this diversity, however, is an arguably even more unusual feature: the fact that even purely descriptive research, focused on what we actually do, cannot proceed without reference to normative considerations, that is, considerations of what we ought to do. Empirical results can thus be understood only with some understanding of the relevant norms of rationality. This article introduces the range of relevant frameworks, followed by examples of the different ways these frameworks are put to use. The bulk of the article then surveys research findings on human rationality across the core areas of (probability) judgment, reasoning, decision-making, and argumentation. Two final sections provide cross-cutting themes, one on the contrast (and interrelationship) between individual and collective rationality and one on the unique challenges of linking rationality research to real-world concerns.

Annual Review of PsychologyVol. 77(1)
Birkbeck, University of London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Classical Philosophy and Thought
17.27
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Human Rationality — Ulrike Hahn · Annual Review of Psychology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS