Assessment of an Information Integration Account of Contingency Judgment With Examination of Subjective Cell Importance and Method of Information Presentation

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

Two experiments used a rich and systematic set of noncontingent problems to examine humans' ability to detect the absence of an inter-event relation. Each found that subjects who used nonnormative strategies were quite inaccurate in judging some types of noncontingent problems. Group data indicated that subjects used the 2 × 2 information in the order Cell A > Cell B > Cell C > Cell D; individual subject data indicated that subjects considered the information in Cell A to be most important, that in Cell D to be least important, and that in Cells B and C to be of intermediate importance. Trial-by-trial presentation led to less accurate contingency judgments and to more uneven use of 2 × 2 cell information than did summary-table presentation. Finally, the judgment processes of about 70% and 80%, respectively, of nonnormative strategy users under trial-by-trial and summary-table procedures could be accounted for by an averaging model.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles