Flat intentions – crazy dispositions?

Future-directed intentions, it is widely held, involve behavioral dispositions. But of what kind? Suppose you now intend to Φ at future time t. Are you thereby now disposed to Φ at t no matter what? If so, your intention disposes you to Φ even if around t you will come to believe that Φ-ing would be crazy. And would not that be a crazy intention to have? – Like considerations have led Luca Ferrero and others to believe that only intentions with strong internal conditions are capable of rationality. This paper explores in how far a broadly dispositional view of intention supports their claims. Its first point will come as a surprise: Intentions indeed involve dispositions toward follies in plenty. Natural objections against this bizarre-sounding claim are shown to fail, and standard counterfactual analyses of disposition locutions are shown to underpin it further. However, since the dispositions at issue are pro tanto dispositions, the consequences are not as odd as might be expected: When hedged by reasonable habits to reconsider one’s intentions, dispositions toward follies do not entail any actual crazy behavior. On balance, unconditional intention is therefore found rational after all. Dispositions toward crazy actions need not be crazy dispositions.     

Caution! Warnings as a Useless Countermeasure to Reduce Overconfidence? An Experimental Evaluation in Light of Enhanced and Dynamic Warning Designs

People often display excessive overconfidence when providing interval estimates, which biases decision‐making. Research has investigated the various measures to effectively reduce overconfidence, and the use of warnings has subsequently been considered to have a negligible reduction effect. We demonstrate with two separate experiments that the impact of warnings has to be reviewed in light of dynamic warning designs and cognitive warning process models. In experiment 1, in contrast to previous studies that only used unstructured warnings, we implement a warning incorporating some core elements of a structured warning design based on research in the fields of human factors and ergonomics. Furthermore, accounting for recent developments in the warning literature, we distinguish between static and dynamic warning design. In experiment 2, we examine the effectiveness of different elements of dynamic warnings. We show that a significantly higher reduction of overconfidence can be achieved by combining a structured warning content with a dynamic stimulus change to increase the warning's noticeability. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.