Thinking and Reasoning 24 (1):117-128 (2018)
| Abstract |
ABSTRACTIn everyday situations, people regularly receive information from large groups of people and from single experts. Although lay opinions and expert opinions have been studied extensively in isolation, the present study examined the relationship between the two by asking how many laypeople are needed to counter an expert opinion. A Bayesian formalisation allowed the prescription of this quantity. Participants were subsequently asked to assess how many laypeople are needed in different situations. The results demonstrate that people are sensitive to the relevant factors identified for determining how many lay opinions are required to counteract a single expert opinion. People's assessments were fairly good in line with Bayesian predictions.
|
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| Reprint years | 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1080/13546783.2017.1378721 |
| Options |
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Request removal from index
|
Download options
PhilArchive copy
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy Papers currently archived: 63,339
External links
- From the Publisher via CrossRef (no proxy)
- dx.doi.org (no proxy)
- tandfonline.com (no proxy)
- tandfonline.com [2] (no proxy)
- doi.org
(no proxy) - tandfonline.com [3] (no proxy)
- tandfonline.com [4] (no proxy)
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
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver..
- Configure custom resolver
References found in this work BETA
The Rationality of Informal Argumentation: A Bayesian Approach to Reasoning Fallacies.Ulrike Hahn & Mike Oaksford - 2007 - Psychological Review 114 (3):704-732.
A Normative Framework for Argument Quality: Argumentation Schemes with a Bayesian Foundation.Ulrike Hahn & Jos Hornikx - 2016 - Synthese 193 (6):1833-1873.
The Appeal to Expert Opinion: Quantitative Support for a Bayesian Network Approach.Adam J. L. Harris, Ulrike Hahn, Jens K. Madsen & Anne S. Hsu - 2016 - Cognitive Science 40 (6):1496-1533.
A Bayesian Approach to Informal Argument Fallacies.Ulrike Hahn & Mike Oaksford - 2006 - Synthese 152 (2):207-236.
Dynamic Inference and Everyday Conditional Reasoning in the New Paradigm.Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater - 2013 - Thinking and Reasoning 19 (3-4):346-379.
View all 14 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Argument Quality in Real World Argumentation.Ulrike Hahn - 2020 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 24 (5):363-374.
Bayesian or Biased? Analytic Thinking and Political Belief Updating.Ben M. Tappin, Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand - 2020 - Cognition 204:104375.
Similar books and articles
Why Arguments From Expert Opinion Are Weak Arguments.Moti Mizrahi - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (1):57-79.
The Appeal to Expert Opinion: Quantitative Support for a Bayesian Network Approach.Adam J. L. Harris, Ulrike Hahn, Jens K. Madsen & Anne S. Hsu - 2016 - Cognitive Science 40 (6):1496-1533.
Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science.Roger M. Cooke - 1991 - Oxford University Press.
Mizrahi and Seidel: Experts in Confusion.Martin David Hinton - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (4):539-554.
On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
Expertise and Public Ignorance.Evan M. Selinger - 2003 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 15 (3-4):375-386.
How to Consult an Expert? Opinion Versus Evidence.Thomas Lanzi & Jerome Mathis - 2011 - Theory and Decision 70 (4):447-474.
Argument From Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System.David M. Godden & Douglas Walton - 2006 - Ratio Juris 19 (3):261-286.
The Assessment of Argumentation From Expert Opinion.Jean H. M. Wagemans - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):329-339.
Risk Assessment and Uncertainty.Kristin Shrader-Frechette - 1988 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:504 - 517.
Expertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry.Axel Gelfert - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):297-312.
Argument From Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System.Douglas Walton David M. Godden - 2006 - Ratio Juris 19 (3):261-286.
Putting Experts in Their Place.Paul J. Quirk - 2008 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 20 (3):333-357.
Arguments From Expert Opinion and Persistent Bias.Moti Mizrahi - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (2):175-195.
Perception of Public Opinion: Bias in Estimating Group Opinions.Sei-Hill Kim - 2001 - World Futures 57 (5):435-451.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2017-09-23
Total views
48 ( #222,378 of 2,448,787 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #444,630 of 2,448,787 )
2017-09-23
Total views
48 ( #222,378 of 2,448,787 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #444,630 of 2,448,787 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads
