Details

Title

Afterthoughts on biases in history perception

Journal title

Polish Psychological Bulletin

Yearbook

2010

Numer

No 2

Authors

Divisions of PAS

Nauki Humanistyczne i Społeczne

Publisher

Committee for Psychological Science PAS

Date

2010

Identifier

DOI: 10.2478/v10059-010-0011-5

Source

Polish Psychological Bulletin; 2010; No 2

References

Ankersmit F. (2004), Narracja, reprezentacja, doświadczenie. Studia z teorii historiografii [Narrative, representation, experience. Studies from theory of historiography]. ; Bouwel J. (2008), A pragmatist defense of non-relativistic explanatory pluralism in history and social science, History & Theory, 47, 168, doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2008.00445.x ; Christensen-Szalanski J. (1991), The hindsight bias: A meta-analysis, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48, 147, doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90010-Q ; Davis M. (1994), Empathy: A social psychological approach. ; D'Oro G. (2009), Reclaiming the ancestors of Simulation Theory, History & Theory, 48, 129, doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2009.00492.x ; Dymkowski M. (2000), Między psychologią a historią. O roli złudzeń w dziejach [Between psychology and history. On role of illusions in history]. ; Dymkowski M. (2006), Próby rozumienia uczestników dziejów jako źródło deformacji poznania historycznego [The attempts of history participants comprehension as a source of the biases in historical cognition], Historyka. Studia Metodologiczne, 36, 23. ; Dymkowski M. (2007), The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment: Hindsight bias among historians, Polish Psychological Bulletin, 38, 24. ; Fiske S. (1991), Social cognition. ; Fischhoff B. (1975), Hindsight ≠ foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 288, doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.1.3.288 ; Guilbault R. (2004), A meta-analysis of research on hindsight bias, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, 103, doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2602&3_1 ; Hawkins S. (1990), Hindsight: Biased judgments of past events after the outcomes are known, Psychological Bulletin, 107, 311, doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.3.311 ; Hempel C. (1949), Readings in philosophical analysis, 503. ; Hempel C. (1991), The philosophy of science, 299. ; Hilton D. (2010), Selecting explanations from causal chains: Do statistical principles explain preferences for voluntary causes?, European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 383. ; Huang C. (2007), The defining character of Chinese historical thinking, History & Theory, 46, 180, doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2007.00398.x ; Ji L. (2008), The leopard cannot change his spots, or can he? Culture and the development of lay theories of change, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 613, doi.org/10.1177/0146167207313935 ; Ji L. (2009), Looking into the past: cultural differences in perception and representation of the past, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 761, doi.org/10.1037/a0014498 ; Kaye S. (2010), Challenging certainty: The utility and history of counterfactualism, History & Theory, 49, 38, doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2010.00527.x ; Lorenz Ch. (2009), Przekraczanie granic. Eseje z filozofii historii i teorii historiografii [Bordercrossings. Essays from philosophy of history and theory of historiography]. ; Mey T. (2003), Explanation and thought experiments in history, History & Theory, 42, 28, doi.org/10.1111/1468-2303.00227 ; Nisbett R. (2003), The geography of thought. How Asians and Westerners think differently … and why. ; Nisbett R. (1980), Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. ; Nisbett R. (1977), Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes, Psychological Review, 84, 231, doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231 ; Oyserman D. (2002), Rethinking individualism and cllectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses, Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3, doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3 ; Pezzo M. (2003), Surprise, defense, or making sense: What removes hindsight bias?, Memory, 11, 421, doi.org/10.1080/09658210244000603 ; Rembowski J. (1989), Empatia. Studium psychologiczne [Empathy. Psychological study. ; Rosenfeld G. (2002), Why do ask ‘what if?’ Reflections on the function of alternate history, History & Theory, 41, 90, doi.org/10.1111/1468-2303.00222 ; Sanna L. (2002), When debiasing backfires: Accessible content and accessibility experiences in debiasing hindsight, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 497, doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.497 ; Sanna L. (2003), Debiasing the hindsight bias: The role of accessibility experiences and (mis)attributions, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 287, doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00528-0 ; Stannard D. (1980), Shrinking history. On Freud and failure of psychohistory. ; Stueber K. (2002), The psychological basis of historical explanation: Reenactment, simulation, and the fusion of horizons, History & Theory, 41, 25, doi.org/10.1111/1468-2303.00189 ; Stueber K. (2008), Reasons, generalizations, empathy, and narratives: The epistemic structure of action explanation, History & Theory, 47, 31, doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2008.00434.x ; Szaluta J. (1999), Psychohistory: Theory and practice. ; Tajfel H. (1986), Psychology of intergroup relations, 7. ; Teigen K. (2004), When the past becomes history: Effects of temporal order on explanations of trends, European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 191, doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.191 ; Topolski J. (1996), Jak się pisze i rozumie historię [How one writes and comprehends the history]. ; Tversky A. (1974), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, Science, 185, 1124, doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 ; Voss J. (2006), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance, 569, doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816796.033 ; Wasserman D. (1991), Hindsight and causality, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 30, doi.org/10.1177/0146167291171005

Aims and scope

Polish Psychological Bulletin (founded in 1970) is an official journal of Polish Academy of Sciences, Committee for Psychological Science.The journal publish a variety of papers, including empirical reports of experiments, surveys and field studies, theoretical articles, controversies and analytic papers on important psychological topics. Relevance for an international readership is our prominent goal, Polish Psychological Bulletin does not publish clinical case studies, or technical articles. Submissions from all domains of psychology are encouraged, especially those that address new developments and pursue innovative approaches.

Periodically, the journal will announce a call for papers for special issues. The journal will also entertain unsolicited proposals for special issues that fit the stated scope of the Polish Psychiological Bulletin (please contact the journal’s Editor-in-Chief with a detailed description of your proposal).

All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous evaluation of content and merit by independent expert reviewers.

For information on specific requirements, please see the Author Guidelines.

Abstracting & Indexing


Abstracting and Indexing Information


• DESY Publication Database

• Directory of Open Access Journal (DOAJ)

• Current Contents: Social & Behavioral Sciences

• Dimensions

• EBSCO

• ERIH Plus

• Google Scholar

• Index Copernicus

• ProQuest

• PsychArchives

• Science Open

• SCOPUS (Elsevier)

• Sherpa/RoMEO

Publication Ethics Policy

Peer Review and Ethics

Polish Psychological Bulletin is committed to peer-review integrity and upholding the highest standards of review.
Once your paper has been assessed for suitability by the editor, it will then be double blind peer reviewed by independent, anonymous authorities in the field.
Our guidance on publishing ethics is in accrdance with the COPE standards (see: https://publicationethics.org).
×