How to Make Cognitive Illusions Disappear: Beyond “Heuristics and Biases”
- 1 January 1991
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in European Review of Social Psychology
- Vol. 2 (1) , 83-115
- https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779143000033
Abstract
Most so-called “errors” in probabilistic reasoning are in fact not violations of probability theory. Examples of such “errors” include overconfidence bias, conjunction fallacy, and base-rate neglect. Researchers have relied on a very narrow normative view, and have ignored conceptual distinctions—e.g. single case versus relative frequency—fundamental to probability theory. By recognizing and using these distinctions, however, we can make apparently stable “errors” disappear, reappear, or even invert. I suggest what a reformed understanding of judgments under uncertainty might look like.Keywords
This publication has 49 references indexed in Scilit:
- ProbabilismErkenntnis, 1989
- Cognitive heuristics and biases in behavioral auditing: Review, comments and observationsAccounting, Organizations and Society, 1989
- Abstraction is Uncooperative*Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 1984
- Base Rates in Bayesian Inference: Signal Detection Analysis of the Cab ProblemThe American Journal of Psychology, 1983
- Interpretation by Physicians of Clinical Laboratory ResultsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1978
- Naive attributors' attributions and predictions: What is informative and when is an effect an effect?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1978
- Do people use consensus information in making causal attributions?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977
- Attribution and the psychology of prediction.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975
- Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and BiasesScience, 1974
- On the psychology of prediction.Psychological Review, 1973