Nested sets and base-rate neglect: Two types of reasoning?

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (3):260-261 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Barbey & Sloman (B&S) claim that frequency formats and other task manipulations induce people to substitute associative thinking for rule-based thinking about nested sets. My critique focuses on the substitution assumption. B&S demonstrate that nested sets are important to solve base-rate problems but they do not show that thinking about these nested sets relies on a different type of reasoning

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,098

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Naturally nested, but why dual process?Ben Newell & Brett Hayes - 2007 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (3):276-277.
Base-rate neglect and coarse probability representation.Yanlong Sun & Hongbin Wang - 2007 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (3):282-282.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
31 (#533,234)

6 months
1 (#1,516,603)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?