...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >Commentary: Extensional Versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment
【24h】

Commentary: Extensional Versus Intuitive Reasoning: The Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment

机译:评论:扩展与直觉推理:概率判断中的合取谬误

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

The “Linda problem” (Tversky and Kahneman, 1983) is arguably one of the best-known examples of how people commit the conjunction fallacy (cited 1100 times in Web of Science as of November 2015). In this broadly recognized experiment, more than 80 percent of participants failed to recognize the conjunction rule, one of the most fundamental statistical laws, which expresses that the probability of both “A” and “B” being true cannot be higher than the probability of “A” alone being true.
机译:“琳达问题”(Tversky和Kahneman,1983年)可以说是人们如何犯连词谬论的最著名例子之一(截至2015年11月,Web of Science引用了1100次)。在这个广为接受的实验中,超过80%的参与者未能认识到连词规则,这是最基本的统计定律之一,它表示“ A”和“ B”都为真的概率不能高于仅“ A”是真实的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号