Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (NMH) conduct three experiments designed to test whether exemplar cuing (EC) theory or a statistical format theory provides a more accurate account for how people make judgments about low-probability events. They report finding support for the statistical format theory and little or no support for EC. However, NMH misstate the requirements for the production of exemplars in EC theory. As a result, they confuse non-exemplar conditions with exemplar conditions in their experiments, and find results that are virtually irrelevant to EC theory. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Koehler, J., Macchi, L. (2009). Comments on "Getting scarred and winning lotteries: Effects of exemplar cuing and statistical format on imagining low-probability events," by Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (2008). JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 22(5), 523-527 [10.1002/bdm.639].
Comments on "Getting scarred and winning lotteries: Effects of exemplar cuing and statistical format on imagining low-probability events," by Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (2008)
MACCHI, LAURA
2009
Abstract
Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (NMH) conduct three experiments designed to test whether exemplar cuing (EC) theory or a statistical format theory provides a more accurate account for how people make judgments about low-probability events. They report finding support for the statistical format theory and little or no support for EC. However, NMH misstate the requirements for the production of exemplars in EC theory. As a result, they confuse non-exemplar conditions with exemplar conditions in their experiments, and find results that are virtually irrelevant to EC theory. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
