David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Thinking and Reasoning 9 (3):185 – 201 (2003)
Intuitive predictions and judgements under uncertainty are often mediated by judgemental heuristics that sometimes lead to biases. Our micro-developmental study suggests that a presumption of rationality is justified for adult subjects, in so far as their systematic judgemental biases appear to be due to a specific executive-inhibition failure in working memory, and not necessarily to a lack of understanding of the fundamental principles of probability. This hypothesis was tested using an experimental procedure in which 60 adult subjects were trained to inhibit the classical conjunction bias on a frequency judgement task derived from Tversky and Kahneman's work. Pre- and post-test performance was assessed via a probability judgement task. The data indicated a training effect, suggesting that subjects traditionally labelled as "irrational" with respect to the classical rules of inductive reasoning are in fact "inefficient inhibitors". These findings are discussed in terms of a polymorphous view of rationality.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Wim De Neys & Tamara Glumicic (2008). Conflict Monitoring in Dual Process Theories of Thinking. Cognition 106 (3):1248-1299.
Maria Augustinova, Julie Collange, Rasyid Bo Sanitioso & Serban C. Musca (2011). Power of the Desired Self: Influence of Induced Perceptions of the Self on Reasoning. Cognition 121 (3):299-312.
Similar books and articles
Crupi Vincenzo, Fitelson Branden & Tentori Katya, Probability, Confirmation, and the Conjunction Fallacy.
Rodrigo Moro (2009). On the Nature of the Conjunction Fallacy. Synthese 171 (1):1 - 24.
Gary Charness, Edi Karni & Dan Levin, On the Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment: New Experimental Evidence.
Vincenzo Crupi, Branden Fitelson & Katya Tentori (2008). Probability, Confirmation, and the Conjunction Fallacy. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (2):182 – 199.
Jonah N. Schupbach (2012). Is the Conjunction Fallacy Tied to Probabilistic Confirmation? Synthese 184 (1):13-27.
Andreas Jarvstad & Ulrike Hahn (2011). Source Reliability and the Conjunction Fallacy. Cognitive Science 35 (4):682-711.
Keith E. Stanovich Richard & F. West (1998). Individual Differences in Framing and Conjunction Effects. Thinking and Reasoning 4 (4):289 – 317.
Sylvain Moutier, Nathalie Angeard & Olivier Houde (2002). Deductive Reasoning and Matching-Bias Inhibition Training: Evidence From a Debiasing Paradigm. Thinking and Reasoning 8 (3):205 – 224.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #225,832 of 1,789,728 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #138,886 of 1,789,728 )
How can I increase my downloads?