Recent evidence suggests that the conjunction fallacy observed in people's probabilistic reasoning is also to be found in their evaluations of inductive argument strength. We presented 130 participants with materials likely to produce a conjunction fallacy either by virtue of a shared categorical or a causal relationship between the categories in the argument. We also took a measure of participants' cognitive ability. We observed conjunction fallacies overall with both sets of materials but found an association with ability for the categorical materials only. Our results have implications for accounts of individual differences in reasoning, for the relevance theory of induction, and for the recent claim that causal knowledge is important in inductive reasoning.
|Number of pages||6|
|Journal||PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW|
|Publication status||Published - Oct 2007|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Psychology (miscellaneous)
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology