Ecological rationality

The framework, associated above all with Gerd Gigerenzer and Peter Todd's ABC Research Group, holding that rationality is a fit between strategy and environment rather than conformity to a context-free norm. Its currency is adaptive, good-enough performance achieved by simple heuristics (e.g. take-the-best) that exploit environmental structure — explicitly "not optimization." It descends from Simon's bounded rationality and is one of the rehabilitations of human reasoning that share the "the yardstick was wrong, not the reasoner" move (claim-oaksford-chater-redefine-rationality-as-reasoning-about-uncertainty).

Its relationship to Oaksford & Chater's optimality-referenced rational analysis is contested, not compatible: the two agree on the diagnosis but disagree on whether the mind maximizes or merely manages (observation-ecological-rationality-and-rational-analysis-are-contested-not-compatible).

References

• claim-gigerenzer-camp-defines-ecological-rationality-as-not-optimization · claim-brighton-2006-reanalysis-reversed-take-the-best-result-against-chater-oaksford · claim-evans-2009-bbs-calls-oaksford-chater-ecological-rationality-link-unclear · observation-ecological-rationality-and-rational-analysis-are-contested-not-compatible
• Context: rationality-continuity-problem · claim-oaksford-chater-recast-wason-task-as-optimal-data-selection
• Open thread: question-verify-ecological-rationality-vs-rational-analysis-compatibility (answered) · question-corroborate-brighton-2006-take-the-best-reanalysis-chater-oaksford-reply
• Captures: 2026-07-31-are-gigerenzers-ecological-rationality-and-oaksford-chaters-rational