Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T03:21:33.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Implications of real-world distributions and the conversation game for studies of human probability judgments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2007

John C. Thomas
Affiliation:
T. J. Watson Research Center, IBM, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598. jcthomas@us.ibm.comhttp://www.truthtable.com

Abstract

Subjects in experiments use real-life strategies that differ significantly from those assumed by experimenters. First, true randomness is rare in both natural and constructed environments. Second, communication follows conventions which depend on the game-theoretic aspects of situations. Third, in the common rhetorical stance of storytelling, people do not tell about the representative but about unusual, exceptional, and rare cases.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clark, H. H. & Brennan, S. E. (1991) Grounding in communication. In: Perspectives on socially shared cognition, ed. Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M. & Teasley, S. D.. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1978) Some further notes on logic and conversation. In: Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts, ed. Cole, P., pp. 225–42. Academic Press.Google Scholar
McKee, R. (1997) Story: Substance, structure, style and the principles of screenwriting. Harper-Collins.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. C. (1978) A design-interpretation analysis of natural English. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 10:651–68.Google Scholar