The conjunction effect: Fallacy or Bayesian inference?

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 67, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 76-90

  Fisk, John E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030191493     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1996.0066     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Agnoli, F., & Krantz, D. H. (1989). Suppressing natural heuristics by formal instruction. The case of the conjunction fallacy. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 515-550.
2. Bar-Hillel, M. (1991). Commentary on Wolford, Taylor, & Beck: The conjunction fallacy? Memory and Cognition, 19, 412-414.
3. Christensen, I. P. (1979). Distributional and non-distributional uncertainty. In C. R. Bell (Ed.), Uncertain outcomes (pp. 49-59). Lancaster: NTP Press.
4. Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: When people behave against their better judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 819-829.
5. Epstein, S., Lipson, A., Holstein, C., & Huh, E. (1992). Irrational reactions to negative outcomes: Evidence for two conceptual systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 328-339.
6. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Fabre, J., Caverni, J. P., & Jungermann, H. (1996). Causality does influence conjunctive probability judgments if context and design allow for it. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, in press.
8. Fiedler, K. (1988). The dependence of the conjunction fallacy on subtle linguistic factors. Psychological Research, 50, 123-129.
9. Fisk, J. E., & Pidgeon, N. (1996a). Component probabilities and the conjunction fallacy: Resolving signed summation and the low component model in a contingent approach. Acta Psychologica, in press.
10. Fisk, J. E., & Pidgeon, N. (1996b). The conjunction fallacy: The case for the existence of competing heuristic strategies. British Journal of Psychology, in press.
11. Gavanski, I., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (1991). Representativeness and conjoint probability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 181-194.
12. Gigerenzer, G. (1991). How to make cognitive illusions disappear: Beyond "heuristics and biases." Chapter 4 In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology, Volume 2 (Chapter 4). Chichester: Wiley.
13. Ichikawa, S., & Takeichi, H. (1990). Erroneous beliefs in estimating posterior probability. Behaviormetrika, 27, 59-73.
14. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80, 237-251.
15. Phillips, L. D., & Edwards, W. (1966). Conservatism in a simple probability inference task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 346-357.
16. Robinson, L. B., & Hastie, R. (1985). Revision of beliefs when a hypothesis is eliminated from consideration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 443-456.
17. Shafir, E. B., Smith, E. E., & Osherson, D. N. (1990). Typicality and reasoning fallacies. Memory and Cognition, 18, 229-239.
18. Shimojo, S., & Ichikawa, S. (1989). Intuitive reasoning about probability: Theoretical and experimental analyses of the ";problem of three prisoners." Cognition, 32, 1-24.
19. Smithson, M. (1988). Ignorance and uncertainty. Springer: Berlin.
20. Teigen, K. H. (1994). Variants of subjective probabilities: Concepts, norms and biases. In G. Wright & P. Ayton (Eds.), Subjective probability. Wiley: Chichester.
21. Teigen, K. H., Martinussen, M., & Lund, T. (1995). Linda vs. world cup: Conjunctive probabilities in three-event fictional and real-life predictions. Manuscript submitted for publication.
22. Thüring, M., & Jungermann, H. (1990). The conjunction fallacy: Causality vs. event probability. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 61-74.
23. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293-315.
24. Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547-567.
25. Van Wallendael, L. R. (1989). The quest for limits on noncomplementarity in opinion revision. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 385-405.
26. Van Wallendael, L. R., & Hastie, R. (1990). Tracing the footsteps of Sherlock Holmes: Cognitive representations of hypothesis testing. Memory and Cognition, 18, 240-250.
27. Wells, G. L. (1985). The conjunction error and the representativeness heuristic. Social Cognition, 3, 266-279.
28. Wolford, G., Taylor, H. A., & Beck, J. R. (1990). The conjunction fallacy? Memory and Cognition, 18, 47-53.
29. Yates, J. F. (1990). Judgment and decision making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
30. Yates, J. F., & Carlson, B. W. (1986). Conjunction errors: Evidence for multiple judgment procedures including "Signed Summation". Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 37, 230-253.
31. Zuckerman, M., Eghrari, H., & Lambrecht, M. R. (1986). Attributions as inferences and explanations: Conjunction effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1144-1153.