title: Partition-edit-count: naive extensional reasoning in judgment of conditional probability.
abstract: The authors provide evidence that people typically evaluate conditional probabilities by subjectively partitioning the sample space into n interchangeable events, editing out events that can be eliminated on the basis of conditioning information, counting remaining events, then reporting probabilities as a ratio of the number of focal to total events. Participants' responses to conditional probability problems were influenced by irrelevant information (Study 1), small variations in problem wording (Study 2), and grouping of events (Study 3), as predicted by the partition-edit-count model. Informal protocol analysis also supports the authors' interpretation. A 4th study extends this account from situations where events are treated as interchangeable (chance and ignorance) to situations where participants have information they can use to distinguish among events (uncertainty).
authors.affiliation: Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, USA. craig.fox@anderson.ucla.edu
authors.forename: Craig R
authors.initials: CR
authors.lastname: Fox
authors.forename: Jonathan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Levav
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D007600:Judgment; D011336:Probability; D011340:Problem Solving; D011582:Psychological Theory