|
If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | ||||||||
  Mind & LanguageVolume 19 Issue 2, Pages 199 - 210 Published Online: 16 Mar 2004 Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Abstract | References | Full Text: PDF (Size: 94K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking  A Different Conjunction Fallacy Research supported by NSF grant IIS‐9978135, the CNR Agenzia2000, and the Cognitive Science Laboratory of Rovereto. Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2004 ABSTRACTAbstract: 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. Received: 28 February 2002; Accepted: 09 September 2002; | 
| |||||||
