Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-11T10:34:38.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Bayesian Psychology Is Incomplete

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Frank Döring
Frank Döring*
Affiliation:
University of Cincinnati
*
†Department of Philosophy, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221–0374; email: doringf@email.uc.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bayesian psychology, in what is perhaps its most familiar version, is incomplete: Jeffrey conditionalization is not a complete account of rational belief change. Jeffrey conditionalization is sensitive to the order in which the evidence arrives. This order effect can be so pronounced as to call for a belief adjustment that cannot be understood as an assimilation of incoming evidence by Jeffrey's rule. Hartry Field's reparameterization of Jeffrey's rule avoids the order effect but fails as an account of how new evidence should be assimilated.

Type
Probability and Statistical Inference
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 66 , Issue S3: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1998 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part I: Contributed Papers Sep., 1999 , 1999 , pp. S379 - S389
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Thanks to Christopher Gauker, Richard Jeffrey, and Robert Rynasiewicz for helping me sort out my thoughts on Bayesian updating.

References

Boutilier, Craig (1995), “On the Revision of Probabilistic Belief States”, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36(1): 158–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaconis, Persi and Zabell, Sandy L. (1982), “Updating Subjective Probability”, Journal of the American Statistical Association 77(380): 822–830.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, Hartry (1978), “A Note on Jeffrey Conditionalization”, Philosophy of Science 45: 361–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garber, Daniel (1980), “Discussion: Field and Jeffrey Conditionalization”, Philosophy of Science 47: 142–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, Richard C. (1983), The Logic of Decision, 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
effrey, Richard C. (1988), “Conditioning, Kinematics, and Exchangeability”, in Skyrms, Brian and Harper, William L (eds.), Causation, Chance, and Credence, vol. 1. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 221–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Glenn (1976), A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9780691214696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafer, Glenn. (1981), “Jeffrey's Rule of Conditioning”, Philosophy of Science 48: 337–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar