Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Why quantum probability does not explain the conjunction fallacy

  • Katya Tentori (a1) and Vincenzo Crupi (a2)
Abstract
Abstract

We agree with Pothos & Busemeyer (P&B) that formal tools can be fruitfully employed to model human judgment under uncertainty, including well-known departures from principles of classical probability. However, existing findings either contradict P&B's quantum probability approach or support it to a limited extent. The conjunction fallacy serves as a key illustration of both kinds of problems.

Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

F. J. Costello (2009) How probability theory explains the conjunction fallacy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 22:213–34.

V. Crupi , B. Fitelson & K. Tentori (2008) Probability, confirmation, and the conjunction fallacy. Thinking & Reasoning 14:182–99.

H. Nilsson , A. Winman , P. Juslin & G. Hansson (2009) Linda is not a bearded lady: Configural weighting and adding as the cause of extension errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138:517–34.

K. Tentori , N. Bonini & D. Osherson (2004) The conjunction fallacy: A misunderstanding about conjunction? Cognitive Science 28:467–77.

A. Tversky & D. Kahneman (1982) Judgments of and by representativeness. In: Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, ed. D. Kahneman , P. Slovic & A. Tversky , pp. 8498). Cambridge University Press.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences
  • ISSN: 0140-525X
  • EISSN: 1469-1825
  • URL: /core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 4
Total number of PDF views: 33 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 132 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th June 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.