Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Judgments under uncertainty: representativeness or potential surprise?

John E Fisk1

  • 1Centre for Applied Psychology, Liverpool John Moores University, UK. j.e.fisk@livjm.ac.uk

British Journal of Psychology (London, England : 1953)
|January 10, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Exploring Pathways to Gambling: Proposing the Integrated Risk and Protective Factors Model of Gambling Types.

Journal of gambling studies·2020
Same author

An account of subjective probability judgment for joint events: Conjunctive and disjunctive.

Scandinavian journal of psychology·2019
Same author

Paranormal belief, thinking style preference and susceptibility to confirmatory conjunction errors.

Consciousness and cognition·2018
Same author

Executive processes and timing: Comparing timing with and without reference memory.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2018
Same author

Paranormal belief and errors of probabilistic reasoning: The role of constituent conditional relatedness in believers' susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy.

Consciousness and cognition·2017
Same author

Updating of working memory in ecstasy polydrug users: Findings from fNIRS.

Human psychopharmacology·2017

This study challenges the representativeness heuristic for probability judgments. It proposes potential surprise as a key mechanism, showing smaller probabilities determine conjunctions and larger ones determine disjunctions.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Decision Science

Background:

  • Tversky and Kahneman's (1983) representativeness heuristic is a dominant explanation for conjunctive probability judgments.
  • This study questions the representativeness heuristic's applicability to conjunctive probability judgment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose and investigate potential surprise (Shackle, 1969) as a mechanism for subjective probability judgment.
  • To contrast the representativeness heuristic with potential surprise theory in explaining probability judgments.

Main Methods:

  • Three studies were conducted to examine probability judgments for conjunctions and disjunctions.
  • The studies analyzed the influence of component event probabilities on the judgment of combined events.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • Study 1: Probabilities for conjunctions were mainly determined by the smaller component event probability, aligning with potential surprise theory.
  • Study 2: For disjunctions, the larger component event probability played a similar role, also consistent with potential surprise.
  • Study 3: Results indicated two reasoning processes: analytical (considering both components) and heuristic (consistent with potential surprise).

Conclusions:

  • Potential surprise offers an alternative and empirically supported explanation for probability judgments, particularly for conjunctions and disjunctions.
  • Findings suggest that heuristic-based reasoning, as described by potential surprise, significantly influences subjective probability judgments.
  • The results have implications for understanding person perception, stereotyping, categorization, and typicality judgments.