Document Detail

Source reliability and the conjunction fallacy.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  21564268     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Data-Review    
Information generally comes from less than fully reliable sources. Rationality, it seems, requires that one take source reliability into account when reasoning on the basis of such information. Recently, Bovens and Hartmann (2003) proposed an account of the conjunction fallacy based on this idea. They show that, when statements in conjunction fallacy scenarios are perceived as coming from such sources, probability theory prescribes that the "fallacy" be committed in certain situations. Here, the empirical validity of their model was assessed. The model predicts that statements added to standard conjunction problems will change the incidence of the fallacy. It also predicts that statements from reliable sources should yield an increase in fallacy rates (relative to unreliable sources). Neither the former (Experiment 1) nor the latter prediction (Experiment 3) was confirmed, although Experiment 2 showed that people can derive source reliability estimates from the likelihood of statements in a manner consistent with the tested model. In line with the experimental results, model fits and sensitivity analyses also provided very little evidence in favor of the model. This suggests that Bovens and Hartmann's present model fails to explain fully people's judgements in standard conjunction fallacy tasks.
Andreas Jarvstad; Ulrike Hahn
Related Documents :
16492198 - Redundancy in designs.
10834568 - Simulation of cow-calf production systems in a range environment: i. model development.
21972248 - Rational design of novel anti-microtubule agent (9-azido-noscapine) from quantitative s...
9267588 - Fuzzy set theory in medicine.
23599378 - A socioeconomic deprivation index for small areas in denmark.
24345388 - Quantitative comparison of cortical surface reconstructions from mp2rage and multi-echo...
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article     Date:  2011-03-07
Journal Detail:
Title:  Cognitive science     Volume:  35     ISSN:  1551-6709     ISO Abbreviation:  Cogn Sci     Publication Date:  2011 May 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2011-05-13     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7708195     Medline TA:  Cogn Sci     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  682-711     Citation Subset:  IM    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2011 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.
School of Psychology, Cardiff University.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Rules versus statistics: insights from a highly inflected language.
Next Document:  Prior divergence: do researchers and participants share the same prior probability distributions?