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

In this research, we examined the role that individual differences in working memory (WM) capacity, the strength of alternatives, and time constraints play in probability judgment and subadditivity. With a laboratory-based learning task, Experiment 1 revealed that the degree to which participants' probability judgments were subadditive was negatively correlated with a measure of WM capacity, even when variance due to short-term memory capacity was removed. In addition, participants were more subadditive when the viable alternatives were all rather weak. Experiment 2 extended the WM-capacity-subadditivity correlation to a population judgment task and revealed that subadditivity increases when the judgment task is performed under time constraints. Results support a model that assumes that people make probability judgments by comparing the focal hypothesis with relevant alternatives retrieved from long-term memory and that people high in WM span include more alternatives in the comparison process. Time constraints are assumed to truncate the alternative generation process, leading to fewer alternatives being recalled from long-term memory.

Probability judgment and subadditivity: The role of working memory capacity and constraining retrieval