IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/minsoc/v2y2001i1p31-57.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of pragmatic rules in the conjunction fallacy

Author

Listed:
  • Giuseppe Mosconi
  • Laura Macchi

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuseppe Mosconi & Laura Macchi, 2001. "The role of pragmatic rules in the conjunction fallacy," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 2(1), pages 31-57, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:minsoc:v:2:y:2001:i:1:p:31-57
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02512074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF02512074
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF02512074?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Macchi, Laura, 2000. "Partitive Formulation of Information in Probabilistic Problems: Beyond Heuristics and Frequency Format Explanations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 217-236, July.
    2. Jones, Steven K. & Taylor Jones, Kristine & Frisch, Deborah, 1995. "Biases of Probability Assessment: A Comparison of Frequency and Single-Case Judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 109-122, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Franco Vaio, 2019. "The quantum-like approach to modeling classical rationality violations: an introduction," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 18(1), pages 105-123, June.
    2. Maria Bagassi & Laura Macchi, 2007. "The “vanishing” of the disjunction effect by sensible procrastination," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 6(1), pages 41-52, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gabriella Passerini & Laura Macchi & Maria Bagassi, 2012. "A methodological approach to ratio bias," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(5), pages 602-617, September.
    2. Abel , Martin & Cole, Shawn & Zia, Bilal, 2015. "Debiasing on a roll: changing gambling behavior through experiential learning," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7195, The World Bank.
    3. Arribas, Iván & Comeig, Irene & Urbano, Amparo & Vila, José, 2014. "Statistical formats to optimize evidence-based decision making: A behavioral approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 790-794.
    4. Shin KINOSHITA & Masayuki SATO & Takanori IDA, 2022. "Bayesian Probability Revision and Infection Prevention Behavior in Japan : A Quantitative Analysis of the First Wave of COVID-19," Discussion papers e-22-004, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    5. Price, Paul C., 1998. "Effects of a Relative-Frequency Elicitation Question on Likelihood Judgment Accuracy: The Case of External Correspondence, , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 277-297, December.
    6. Laura Macchi, 2021. "Words, numbers, warnings, tips, but still low risk perception," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 20(1), pages 123-127, June.
    7. Laura Macchi & Maria Bagassi, 2012. "Intuitive and analytical processes in insight problem solving: a psycho-rhetorical approach to the study of reasoning," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 11(1), pages 53-67, June.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:5:p:602-617 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Andrea Polonioli, 2012. "Gigerenzer’s ‘external validity argument’ against the heuristics and biases program: an assessment," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 11(2), pages 133-148, December.
    10. Macchi, Laura, 2000. "Partitive Formulation of Information in Probabilistic Problems: Beyond Heuristics and Frequency Format Explanations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 217-236, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:minsoc:v:2:y:2001:i:1:p:31-57. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.