English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Bayesian reasoning, updating subjective probability in light of new information, is notoriously difficult. One factor that may contribute to this difficulty is lack of a mental model for how to combine the three key parameters in any Bayesian problem. An experiment was conducted contrasting four representations of Bayesian problems: three types of diagrams and a two by two contingency table. All four representations led to extremely good performance on a Bayesian task. This advantage also extended to a superficially dissimilar task and also persisted beyond the day of training, suggesting that graphic and tabular representation can lead to flexible and durable changes in the way people think about such problems.

Understanding Bayesian reasoning via graphical displays