IngentaConnect A Different Conjunction Fallacy

Authors: Bonini N.; Tentori K.; Osherson D.

Source: Mind & Language, Volume 19, Number 2, April 2004 , pp. 199-210(12)

Publisher: Blackwell Publishing

Key:

- Free Content

- New Content

- Subscribed Content

- Free Trial Content

Abstract:

: Because the conjunction p-and-q implies p, the value of a bet on p-and-q cannot exceed the value of a bet on p at the same stakes. We tested recognition of this principle in a betting paradigm that (a) discouraged misreading p as p-and-not-q, and (b) encouraged genuinely conjunctive reading of p-and-q. Frequent violations were nonetheless observed. The findings appear to discredit the idea that most people spontaneously integrate the logic of conjunction into their assessments of chance.

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2004.00254.x

* This feature is in beta and some links may initially be displayed as numbers instead of article titles. Clicking on any of the links will take you to the recommended articles, regardless of the display of the link.

The full text article is available for purchase

$42.63 plus tax