The enhancement effect in probability judgment

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 293-313

  Koehler, Derek J ^a,b   Brenner, Lyle A ^a,c   Tversky, Amos ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternative hypothesis; Enhancement effect; Focal hypothesis; Judged probability; Subjective probability; Support theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 21944443539     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199712)10:4<293::AID-BDM256>3.0.CO;2-P     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bar-Hillel, M., 'The base-rate fallacy controversy', in Scholz, R. W. (ed.), Decision Making Under Uncertainty (pp. 39-61), Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1984.
2. Cohen, L. J., The Probable and the Provable, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977.
3. Cohen, L. J., 'On the psychology of prediction: Whose is the fallacy?' Cognition, 7 (1979), 385-407.
4. Dawes, R. M., Rational Choice in an Uncertain World. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.
5. Dawes, R. M., Mirels, H. L., Gold, E. and Donahue, E., 'Equating inverse probabilities in implicit personality judgments', Psychological Science, 4 (1993), 396-400.
6. Eddy, D. M., 'Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities', in Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (eds), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 249-267), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
7. Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P. and Lichtenstein, S. 'Fault trees: Sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem representation', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4 (1978), 330-44.
8. Fox, C. R., Rogers, B. A. and Tversky, A., 'Options traders exhibit subadditive decision weights', Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 13 (1996), 5-17.
9. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (eds), Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
10. Koehler, D. J., 'Probability judgment in three-category classification learning', unpublished manuscript, University of Waterloo, 1995.
11. Mehle, T., Gettys, C. F., Manning. C., Baca, S. and Fisher, S. 'The availability explanation of excessive plausibility assessment', Acta Psychologica, 49 (1981), 127-40.
12. Peterson, D. K. and Pitz, G. F., 'Confidence, uncertainty, and the use of information', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14 (1988), 85-92.
13. Redelmeier, D. A., Koehler, D. J., Liberman, V. and Tversky, A. 'Probability judgment in medicine: Discounting unspecified causes', Medical Decision Making, 15 (1995), 227-30.
14. Robinson, L. B. and Hastie, R., 'Revision of beliefs when a hypothesis is eliminated from consideration', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4 (1985), 443-56.
15. Rottenstreich, Y. S. and Tversky, A., 'Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory', Psychological Review, in press.
16. Shafer, G., A Mathematical Theory of Evidence, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976.
17. Teigen, K. H. 'Studies in subjective probability III: The unimportance of alternatives', Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 24 (1983), 97-105.
18. Tversky, A. and Koehler, D. J., 'Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability', Psychological Review, 101 (1994), 547-67.
19. Van Wallendael, L. R. and Hastie, R., 'Tracing the footsteps of Sherlock Holmes: Cognitive representations of hypothesis testing', Memory & Cognition, 18 (1990), 240-50.