We agree with Pothos & Busemeyer (P&B) that formal tools can be fruitfully employed to model human judgment under uncertainty, including well-known departures from principles of classical probability. However, existing findings either contradict P&B's quantum probability approach or support it to a limited extent. The conjunction fallacy serves as a key illustration of both kinds of problems.
Why quantum probability does not explain the conjunction fallacy / Tentori, Katya; Crupi, Vincenzo. - In: BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES. - ISSN 0140-525X. - 36:3(2013), pp. 308-310.
Titolo: | Why quantum probability does not explain the conjunction fallacy |
Autori: | Tentori, Katya; Crupi, Vincenzo |
Autori Unitn: | |
Titolo del periodico: | BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES |
Anno di pubblicazione: | 2013 |
Numero e parte del fascicolo: | 3 |
Codice identificativo Scopus: | 2-s2.0-84877936082 |
Codice identificativo ISI: | WOS:000318909200067 |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI): | http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12003123. |
Handle: | http://hdl.handle.net/11572/95635 |
Citazione: | Why quantum probability does not explain the conjunction fallacy / Tentori, Katya; Crupi, Vincenzo. - In: BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES. - ISSN 0140-525X. - 36:3(2013), pp. 308-310. |
Appare nelle tipologie: | 03.1 Articolo su rivista (Journal article) |
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione