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

Conditionals and conditional probability.

Jonathan S t B T Evans1, Simon J Handley, David E Over

  • 1Centre for Thinking and Language, Department of Psychology, University of Plymouth, England. jevans@plymouth.ac.uk

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition
|April 17, 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

Uncertainty monitoring in reasoning: Cue consistency is more important than belief-logic conflict.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same author

A single process for deductive and inductive inference? Examining the impact of conclusion typicality and argument validity on immediate inferences.

Cognitive psychology·2026
Same author

Conflict detection with invalid inferences: All heuristics, no logic.

Memory & cognition·2025
Same author

Logical intuitions or matching heuristics? Examining the effect of deduction training on belief-based reasoning judgments.

Memory & cognition·2025
Same author

Illusory intuitions: Challenging the claim of non-exclusivity.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2023
Same author

Eye Movements, Pupil Dilation, and Conflict Detection in Reasoning: Exploring the Evidence for Intuitive Logic.

Cognitive science·2023
Same journal

Testing the predictions of a distinctiveness model of memory: The production effect in backward recall.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

On the impact of adjacency on transposed-word effects under serial presentation.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

It's time to opt out: Metacognitive analysis of time regulation under uncertainty.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

The role of statistical learning in attentional guidance during search through naturalistic scenes.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

Representing objects and features in long-term memory: A case for direct feature-feature binding.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same journal

Crossmodal correspondences influence adaptation during rule-based category learning of objects.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
See all related articles

Participants judge conditional probability using either the conditional probability (P(q/p)) or conjunctive probability (P(pq)) when evaluating "if p then q" statements. The material conditional hypothesis was rejected.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Decision Making
  • Probability Theory

Background:

  • Human judgment of conditional statements (if p then q) is complex.
  • Previous research explored various probability heuristics and biases.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate how individuals estimate the probability of conditional statements.
  • To compare three hypotheses: material conditional, conditional probability, and conjunctive probability.

Main Methods:

  • Three experiments were conducted presenting participants with frequency information.
  • Participants judged the probability of "if p then q" statements based on provided data.
  • Individual differences in judgment strategies were analyzed.

Main Results:

Related Experiment Videos

  • The material conditional hypothesis (1 - P(p not q)) was rejected.
  • Evidence supported both conditional probability (P(q/p)) and conjunctive probability (P(pq)) hypotheses.
  • Half of participants used conditional probability; most others used conjunctive probability.

Conclusions:

  • Human probability judgments for conditional statements are not based on the material conditional.
  • Individuals employ either conditional or conjunctive probability strategies.
  • Understanding these heuristics is crucial for cognitive and decision-making research.