BIROn - Birkbeck Institutional Research Online

    Unreliable sources and the conjunction fallacy

    Jarvstad, A. and Hahn, Ulrike (2009) Unreliable sources and the conjunction fallacy. In: Taatgen, N. and van Rijn, H. (eds.) Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, Texas, USA: Cognitive Science Society, pp. 3034-3039. ISBN 9780976831853.

    Full text not available from this repository.


    We provide the first empirical test of a recent, normative account of the conjunction fallacy. According to Bovens and Hartman (2003), an unlikely statement from a partially reliable source is not necessarily more likely than a conjunction statement from another partially reliable source. Hence once information is considered to be coming from potentially not fully reliable sources, the conjunction fallacy is no longer at odds with probability theory. We provide here a simple experimental test of this account, and report comparisons of the Bovens and Hartmann model with Wyer's (1976) model and a simple averaging model. Wyer's model provided the best fit and the averaging model had the highest true positive rate in determining whether individual participants would commit the fallacy or not.


    Item Type: Book Section
    Keyword(s) / Subject(s): conjunction fallacy, conjunction effect, probability judgment, numb
    School: Birkbeck Faculties and Schools > Faculty of Science > School of Psychological Sciences
    Research Centres and Institutes: Birkbeck Knowledge Lab
    Depositing User: Sarah Hall
    Date Deposited: 18 Jun 2015 14:53
    Last Modified: 02 Aug 2023 17:17


    Activity Overview
    6 month trend
    6 month trend

    Additional statistics are available via IRStats2.

    Archive Staff Only (login required)

    Edit/View Item Edit/View Item