Who is susceptible to conjunction fallacies in category-based induction?

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 884-889

  Feeney, Aidan ^a   Shafto, Patrick ^b   Dunning, Darren ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 37349087970     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194116     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. ALEXOPOULOS, D. S. (1997). Reliability and validity of Heim's AH4 in Greece. Personality & Individual Differences, 22, 429-432.
2. EVANS, J. ST. B. T. (2003). In two minds: Dual process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454-459.
3. HANDLEY, S. J., CAPON, A., BEVERIDGE, M., DENNIS, I., & EVANS, J. ST. B. T. (2004). Working memory and inhibitory control in the development of children's reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 10, 175-196.
4. HEIM, A. W. (1970). AH4 group test of intelligence [Manual]. London: National Foundation for Educational Research.
5. LOPEZ, A., ATRAN, S., COLEY, J. D., MEDIN, D., & SMITH, E. E. (1997). The tree of life: Universal and cultural features of folkbiological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 251-295.
6. MEDIN, D., COLEY, J. D., STORMS, G., & HAYES, B. (2003). A relevance theory of induction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 517-532.
7. MOUTIER, S., & HOUDÉ, O. (2003). Judgement under uncertainty and conjunction fallacy inhibition training. Thinking & Reasoning, 9, 185-201.
8. REHDER, B. (2006). When similarity and causality compete in category-based property induction. Memory & Cognition, 34, 3-16.
9. REHDER, B., & HASTIE, R. (2001). Causal knowledge and categories: The effects of causal beliefs on categorization, induction, and similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 323-360.
10. SHAFTO, P., & COLEY, J. D. (2003). Development of categorization and reasoning in the natural world: Novices to experts, naive similarity to ecological knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 641-649.
11. SHAFTO, P., KEMP, C., BARAFF, E., COLEY, J. D., & TENENBAUM, J. B. (2005). Context sensitive induction. Paper presented at the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Stresa, Italy.
12. SLOMAN, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
13. STANOVICH, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. STANOVICH, K. E., & WEST, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Thinking & Reasoning, 4, 289-317
15. TVERSKY, A., & KAHNEMAN, D. (1983). Extensional vs. intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293-315.