On the Conjunction Fallacy in Probability Judgment: New Experimental Evidence Regarding Linda

Edi Karni

Economics Working Paper Archive from The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics

Abstract: This paper reports the results of a series of experiments designed to test whether and to what extent individuals succumb to the conjunction fallacy. Using an experimental design of Kahneman and Tversky (1983), it finds that given mild incentives, the proportion of individuals who violate the conjunction principle is significantly lower than that reported by Kahneman and Tversky. Moreover, when subjects are allowed to consult with other subjects, these proportions fall dramatically, particularly when the size of the group rises from two to three. These findings cast serious doubts about the importance and robustness of such violations for the understanding of real-life economic decisions.

Date: 2009-05
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-cbe and nep-exp
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.econ2.jhu.edu/REPEC/papers/wp552.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: On the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: New experimental evidence regarding Linda (2010)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:jhu:papers:552

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Economics Working Paper Archive from The Johns Hopkins University,Department of Economics 3400 North Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21218. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Humphrey Muturi ().