Verbal and behavioral learning in a probability compounding task

Theory and Decision

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 287-314

  Zizzo, Daniel John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Conjunction fallacy; Heuristics; Learning; Probability compounding

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; DATA ACQUISITION; DECISION MAKING; FEEDBACK; HEURISTIC METHODS; INVESTMENTS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

CONJUNCTION FALLACY; PROBABILITY COMPOUNDING;

PROBABILITY;

EID: 0347528617     PISSN: 00405833     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:THEO.0000004350.81892.1b     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Abelson, R.P., Leddo, J. and Gross, P.H. (1987), The strength of conjunctive explanations, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 13(2), 141-155.
2. Fantino, E. and Savastano, H. (1996), Humans' responses to novel stimulus compounds and the effects of training, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 3(2), 204-207.
3. Fantino, E., Kulik, J., Stolarz-Fantino, S. and Wright, W. (1997), The conjunction fallacy: A test of averaging hypotheses. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 4(1), 96-101.
4. Friedman, M. (1953), Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago: Irwin.
5. Hertwig, R. and Gigerenzer, G. (1999), The 'conjunction fallacy' revisited: How intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 12(4), 275-305.
6. Hoel, P.G. (1984), An Introduction to Mathematical Statistics. New York, Wiley.
7. Massaro, D.W. (1994), A pattern recognition account of decision making, Memory and Cognition 22(5), 616-627.
8. Mellers, B., Hertwig, R. and Kahneman, D. (2001), Do frequency representations eliminate conjunction effects? An exercise in adversarial collaboration, Psychological Science 12(6), 269-275.
9. Mulford, M. and Dawes, R.M. (1999), Subadditivity in memory for personal events, Psychological Science 10(1), 47-51.
10. Shanks, D.R. and St. John, M.F. (1994), Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17(3), 367-447.
11. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1982), Judgements of and by representativeness, In: Kahneman, D. Slovic, P. and Tversky A. (eds.), Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1983), Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgement, Psychological Review 90(4), 239-315.
13. Zizzo, D.J. (2000), Implicit learning of (boundedly) rational behaviour, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23(5), 700-701.
14. Zizzo, D.J. (2001), Choices Between Simple and Compound Lotteries: Experimental Evidence and Neural Network Modelling, Discussion Paper no. 57. Department of Economics, Oxford: University of Oxford.
15. Zizzo, D.J. (2002), Probability Compounding in Words and in Practice. Discussion Paper no. 88. Department of Economics, Oxford: University of Oxford.
16. Zizzo, D.J., Stolarz-Fantino, S., Wen, J. and Fantino, E. (2000), A violation of the monotonicity axiom: Experimental evidence on the conjunction fallacy, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 41(3), 263-276.