Pilditch, T.D. and Hahn, Ulrike and Fenton, N. and Lagnado, D.A. (2020) Dependencies in evidential reports: the case for informational advantages. Cognition 204 (104343), ISSN 0010-0277.
|
Text
40763.pdf - Author's Accepted Manuscript Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Whether assessing the accuracy of expert forecasting, the pros and cons of group communication, or the value of evidence in diagnostic or predictive reasoning, dependencies between experts, group members, or evidence have traditionally been seen as a form of redundancy. We demonstrate that this conception of dependence conflates the structure of a dependency network, and the observations across this network. By disentangling these two elements we show, via mathematical proof and specific examples, that there are cases where dependencies yield an informational advantage over independence. More precisely, when a structural dependency exists, but observations are either partial or contradicting, these observations provide more support to a hypothesis than when this structural dependency does not exist, ceterus paribus. Furthermore, we show that lay reasoners endorse sufficient assumptions underpinning these advantageous structures yet fail to appreciate their implications for probability judgements and belief revision.
Metadata
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| School: | Birkbeck Faculties and Schools > Faculty of Science > School of Psychological Sciences |
| Research Centres and Institutes: | Cognition, Computation and Modelling, Centre for |
| Depositing User: | Ulrike Hahn |
| Date Deposited: | 10 Sep 2020 10:33 |
| Last Modified: | 02 Aug 2023 18:04 |
| URI: | https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/40763 |
Statistics
Additional statistics are available via IRStats2.
Archive Staff Only (login required)
