Response to Comment by Walker et al. on “From Data to Decisions: Processing Information, Biases, and Beliefs for Improved Management of Natural Resources and Environments”

Our different kinds of minds and types of thinking affect the ways we decide, take action, and cooperate (or not). The comment by Walker et al. (2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000750) illustrates several points made by Glynn et al. (2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000487) and many other articles. Namely, biases and beliefs often drive scientific reasoning, and scientists, just like other humans, are intimately attached to their values and heuristics. Scientists, just like many other people, also tend to read and interpret text in ways that best match their individual perceptions of a problem or issue: in many cases paraphrasing and changing the meaning of what they read to better match their initial ideas. Walker et al. are doing interesting and important research on uncertainty. Nonetheless, they misinterpret the work, assumptions, and conclusions brought forth by Glynn et al. (2017, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000487). Key Points Biases, beliefs, heuristics, and values are adaptations to the past, inherent to all decisions and actions, and to knowledge acquisition Clarifications are provided regarding these adaptations, including their role in the design of uncertainty frameworks Misplaced certainty can be as much of a problem as uncertainty in the anticipatory management of wicked problems