Multiple Strategies in Conjunction and Disjunction Judgments: Most People are Normative Part of the Time
نویسندگان
چکیده
Do people use a single strategy or sample from multiple strategies when estimating the conjunction and disjunction of two independent events? Here we address this tension directly by comparing individual level Bayesian simulations of multi and single strategy models using data from a frequency estimation experiment. Participants were shown two statements describing attributes and asked to estimate how many people had either one attribute, conjunction, or disjunction of attributes. In our Bayesian simulations we compare models in which participants either adopt a single strategy or sample from a set of strategies when forming estimates of both conjunctions and disjunctions. We compared every permutation of models in which a participant is responding based on a single component, a weighted average of the two events, probability theory, or combination of strategies. Our findings show that people sample from multiple strategies and are sampling from the normative strategy some of the time.
منابع مشابه
On fallacies and normative reasoning: when people's judgements follow probability theory
The systematic conjunction and disjunction fallacies seen in people’s probability judgments appear to show that people do not reason according to the rules of probability theory. In an experiment examining people’s judgments of the probability of different medical conditions, we find evidence against this view. In this experiment people’s probability judgments closely followed the fundamental ‘...
متن کاملA Unified Account of Conjunction and Disjunction Fallacies in People’s Judgments of Likelihood
This paper describes a simple continuous-valued logic which aims to explain the occurrence of both conjunction fallacies (where a conjunction AandB is judged more likely than a constituent A) and disjunction fallacies (where a disjunction AorB is judged less likely than a constituent A) in people’s judgments of likelihood for simple and complex events. In this model both these fallacies are the...
متن کاملA Quantum Probability-theoretic account of human judgment using Positive-Operator-Valued Measures
People make logically inconsistent probability judgments. The “Linda” problem is a well-known example, which often elicits a conjunction/disjunction fallacy: probability of constituent event A (B) judged more/less likely than their conjunction/disjunction. The Quantum Judgment model (QJM, Busemeyer et al 2011) explains such errors, which are not explainable within classical probability theory. ...
متن کاملTruth Values and Connectives in Some Non-Classical Logics
The question as to whether the propositional logic of Heyting, which was a formalization of Brouwer's intuitionistic logic, is finitely many valued or not, was open for a while (the question was asked by Hahn). Kurt Gödel (1932) introduced an infinite decreasing chain of intermediate logics, which are known nowadays as Gödel logics, for showing that the intuitionistic logic is not finitely (man...
متن کاملIndividuality in Higher Education: The Use of the Multiple-Mnemonic Method to Enhance ESP Students' Vocabulary Development (Depth and Size) and Retention
Vocabulary learning is considered to be the most comprehensive and the most difficult part of language learning for all the students especially for ESP students. These students complain that vocabulary items are too many and are easily forgotten after they are learned. Mnemonic devices, a group of mental strategies, are developed to facilitate vocabulary learning and retention for such students...
متن کامل