2000 character limit reached
Analyizing the Conjunction Fallacy as a Fact (2402.13615v1)
Published 21 Feb 2024 in cs.AI, math.PR, and nlin.AO
Abstract: Since the seminal paper by Tversky and Kahneman, the conjunction fallacy has been the subject of multiple debates and become a fundamental challenge for cognitive theories in decision-making. In this article, we take a rather uncommon perspective on this phenomenon. Instead of trying to explain the nature or causes of the conjunction fallacy (intensional definition), we analyze its range of factual possibilities (extensional definition). We show that the majority of research on the conjunction fallacy, according to our sample of experiments reviewed which covers literature between 1983 and 2016, has focused on a narrow part of the a priori factual possibilities, implying that explanations of the conjunction fallacy are fundamentally biased by the short scope of possibilities explored. The latter is a rather curious aspect of the research evolution in the conjunction fallacy considering that the very nature of it is motivated by extensional considerations.
- Suppressing natural heuristics by formal instruction: The case of the conjunction fallacy. Cognitive Psychology, 21(4):515–550, 1989.
- Maya Bar-Hillel. Representativeness and fallacies of probability judgment. Acta Psychologica, 55(2):91–107, 1984.
- George Boole. An investigation of the laws of thought: on which are founded the mathematical theories of logic and probabilities, volume 2. Walton and Maberly, 1854.
- Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy. Theory and Decision, 2016.
- A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors. Psychological Review, 118:193–218, 2011.
- JR Busemeyer and PD Bruza. Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012.
- Joseph Cambray. Synchronicity: Nature and psyche in an interconnected universe, volume 15. Texas A&M University Press, 2009.
- Linda Cochrane. Kant, Newton, and the conditions of possible experience. PhD thesis, Concordia University, 2006.
- F.J. Costello. How probability theory explains the conjunction fallacy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22:213–234, 2009.
- Klaus Fiedler. The dependence of the conjunction fallacy on subtle linguistic factors. Psychological research, 50(2):123–129, 1988.
- J.E. Fisk. Judgments under uncertainty: Representativeness or potential surprise? British Journal of Psychology, 93:431–449, 2002.
- J.E. Fisk and N. Pidgeon. Component probabilities and the conjunction fallacy: Resolving signed summation and the low component model in a contingent approach. Acta Psychologica, 94:1–20, 1996.
- Justin L Gardner. Optimality and heuristics in perceptual neuroscience. Nature neuroscience, 22(4):514–523, 2019.
- I. Gavanski and D.R. Roskos-Ewoldsen. Representativeness and conjoint probability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61:181–194, 1991.
- Gerd Gigerenzer. On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to kahneman and tversky. Psychological Review, 103:592–596, 1996.
- Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgement. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.
- J. A. Hampton. Overextension of conjunctive concepts: Evidence for a unitary model for concept typicality and class inclusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14:12–32, 1988.
- D. Hastie and R. Dawes. Rational Choice in an Uncertain World: The Psychology of Judgement and Decision Making. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, 2001.
- Cross-cultural comparability of response patterns of subjective probability questions. Advances in comparative survey methods: Multinational, multiregional, and multicultural contexts, pages 457–476, 2018.
- David Lindorff. Psyche, matter and synchronicity: A collaboration between cg jung and wolfgang pauli. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 40(4):571–586, 1995.
- Y. Lu. The conjunction and disjunction fallacies: Explanations of the linda problem by the equate-to-differentiate model. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, pages 1–25, 2015.
- The conjunction fallacy: A task specific phenomenon? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10:243–252, 1984.
- Ren’e Moro. On the nature of the conjunction fallacy. Synthese, 171:1–24, 2009.
- Mioara Mugur-Schächter. Objectivity and descriptional relativities. Foundations of Science, 7:73–180, 2002.
- Itamar Pitowsky. George boole’s ‘conditions of possible experience’and the quantum puzzle. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45(1):95–125, 1994.
- Michael Schirber. Nobel prize: Quantum entanglement unveiled. Physics, 15:153, 2022.
- Typicality and reasoning fallacies. Memory & Cognition, 18(3):229–239, 1990.
- Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction framework. Psychological Bulletin, 134:207–222, 2008.
- The contributions of daniel kahneman and amos tversky. The Journal of Behavioral Finance, 4(2):54–58, 2003.
- The conjunction fallacy: A misunderstanding about conjunction. Cognitive Science, 28:467–477, 2004.
- On the determinants of the conjunction fallacy: Probability versus inductive confirmation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(1):235, 2013.
- A. Tversky and D. Kahneman. Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90:293–315, 1983.
- D.H. Wedell and R. Moro. Testing boundary conditions for the conjunction fallacy: Effects of response mode, conceptual focus, and problem type. Cognition, 107:129–140, 2008.
- Complementarity in the double-slit experiment: Quantum nonseparability and a quantitative statement of bohr’s principle. Physical Review D, 19(2):473, 1979.
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.
