| Literature DB >> 33137265 |
Ethan Ludwin-Peery1, Neil R Bramley2, Ernest Davis3, Todd M Gureckis1.
Abstract
One remarkable aspect of human cognition is our ability to reason about physical events. This article provides novel evidence that intuitive physics is subject to a peculiar error, the classic conjunction fallacy, in which people rate the probability of a conjunction of two events as more likely than one constituent (a logical impossibility). Participants viewed videos of physical scenarios and judged the probability that either a single event or a conjunction of two events would occur. In Experiment 1 (n = 60), participants consistently rated conjunction events as more likely than single events for the same scenes. Experiment 2 (n = 180) extended these results to rule out several alternative explanations. Experiment 3 (n = 100) generalized the finding to different scenes. This demonstration of conjunction errors contradicts claims that such errors should not appear in intuitive physics and presents a serious challenge to current theories of mental simulation in physical reasoning.Entities:
Keywords: inference; intuitive physics; open data; open materials; prediction; preregistered; reasoning
Year: 2020 PMID: 33137265 DOI: 10.1177/0956797620957610
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Psychol Sci ISSN: 0956-7976