The Conjunction Fallacy

In 1983 A. Tversky and D. Kahneman showed that
people sometimes tend to believe that a conjunction
of events (e.g., It rains and it is cold) is more
likely to occur than one of the events at stake
(e.g., It rains). This phenomenon is
called conjunction fallacy as it involves a
logical mistake. Researchers in psychology and
philosophy have engaged in important controversies
around the phenomenon. This work explores three of
these debates. First, it addresses the issue
of the nature of the conjunction fallacy. Is the
conjunction fallacy mainly due to a misunderstanding
of the problem by participants or is it mainly due
to a genuine reasoning bias? Second, it explores
empirical controversies about the factors that
elicit or help to avoid the fallacy. Third, it deals
with the impact of the conjunction fallacy studies
on the issue of human rationality. Does the fact
that most people commit the conjunction fallacy
imply that human beings are in some contexts
irrational? This book should help shed some light on
these debates and should be of interest of
psychologists, philosophers or anyone interested in
the tricks of the human mind.

Autorentext
Rodrigo Moro, Ph.D: Studied Philosophy at University of South
Carolina. Adjunct Professor at Universidad Nacional del Sur,
Bahía Blanca, Argentina.

Klappentext
In 1983 A. Tversky and D. Kahneman showed that people sometimes tend to believe that a conjunction of events (e.g., It rains and it is cold) is more likely to occur than one of the events at stake (e.g., It rains). This phenomenon is called "conjunction fallacy" as it involves a logical mistake. Researchers in psychology and philosophy have engaged in important controversies around the phenomenon. This work explores three of these debates. First, it addresses the issue of the nature of the conjunction fallacy. Is the conjunction fallacy mainly due to a misunderstanding of the problem by participants or is it mainly due to a genuine reasoning bias? Second, it explores empirical controversies about the factors that elicit or help to avoid the fallacy. Third, it deals with the impact of the conjunction fallacy studies on the issue of human rationality. Does the fact that most people commit the conjunction fallacy imply that human beings are in some contexts irrational? This book should help shed some light on these debates and should be of interest of psychologists, philosophers or anyone interested in the tricks of the human mind.