Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/49905
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCharness, Garyen
dc.contributor.authorKarni, Edien
dc.contributor.authorLevin, Danen
dc.date.accessioned2010-03-19-
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-27T15:21:34Z-
dc.date.available2011-09-27T15:21:34Z-
dc.date.issued2009-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/49905-
dc.description.abstractThis 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.en
dc.language.isoengen
dc.publisher|aThe Johns Hopkins University, Department of Economics |cBaltimore, MDen
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aWorking Paper |x552en
dc.subject.ddc330en
dc.subject.keywordConjunction fallacyen
dc.subject.keywordrepresentativeness biasen
dc.subject.keywordgroup consultationen
dc.subject.keywordincentivesen
dc.subject.stwEntscheidung bei Unsicherheiten
dc.subject.stwRationales Verhaltenen
dc.subject.stwWahrscheinlichkeitsrechnungen
dc.subject.stwTesten
dc.titleOn the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: New experimental evidence regarding Linda-
dc.typeWorking Paperen
dc.identifier.ppn601165225en
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.