On the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: new experimental evidence regarding Linda

DOI10.1016/j.geb.2009.09.003zbMath1200.91062WikidataQ56429458 ScholiaQ56429458MaRDI QIDQ2268109

Gary Charness, Edi Karni, Dan Levin

Publication date: 10 March 2010

Published in: Games and Economic Behavior (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/49905

zbMATH Keywords

incentives; conjunction fallacy; group consultation; representativeness bias

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

91B06: Decision theory

91A90: Experimental studies

Related Items

Does consultation improve decision-making?, Can groups solve the problem of over-bidding in contests?, Probability interference in expected utility theory, Good decision vs. good results: outcome bias in the evaluation of financial agents, Role of collective information in networks of quantum operating agents, Information processing by networks of quantum decision makers, On the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: new experimental evidence regarding Linda, Quantum-like models cannot account for the conjunction fallacy, Individual vs. group decision-making: an experiment on dynamic choice under risk and ambiguity, Decision theory with prospect interference and entanglement, Does truth win when teams reason strategically?

Cites Work

• Are four heads better than two? An experimental beauty-contest game with teams of different size
• The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. (With commentaries)
• On the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: new experimental evidence regarding Linda
• Individual and group decision making under risk: An experimental study of Bayesian updating and violations of first-order stochastic dominance
• Large Stakes and Big Mistakes
• Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?
• Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests