Premium
Linda versus World Cup: Conjunctive Probabilities in Three‐event Fictional and Real‐life Predictions
Author(s) -
Teigen Karl Halvor,
Martinussen Monica,
Lund Thorleif
Publication year - 1996
Publication title -
journal of behavioral decision making
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.136
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1099-0771
pISSN - 0894-3257
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1099-0771(199606)9:2<77::aid-bdm211>3.0.co;2-9
Subject(s) - conjunction (astronomy) , representativeness heuristic , event (particle physics) , normative , interpretation (philosophy) , psychology , task (project management) , econometrics , statistics , social psychology , computer science , mathematics , epistemology , economics , philosophy , quantum mechanics , physics , management , astronomy , programming language
Conjunction errors in probability judgments have been explained in terms of representatives, non‐normative combination procedures, and linguistic, conversational, or conceptual misunderstandings. In two studies, a three‐event variant of the classical Linda scenario (Tversky and Kahneman, 1983) was contrasted with estimates of Norway’s chances in three coming World Cup soccer matches. Conjunction errors occurred even in the latter, real‐life prediction task, but much less frequently than in the fictional Linda case. Magnitude of the conjunction effect was found to be dependent upon type of constituent (fictional versus dispositional), unequal versus equal probabilities of constituent events, prediction of positive versus negative outcomes, and, for real‐life predictions only, umber of constitutent events. Fictional probability ratings were close to but lower than representativenss ratings, giving evidence for a representativeness and adjustment‐for‐uncertainty strategy, whereas probabilities of real‐life events were given a causal model interpretation.