Base rate neglect and conservatism in probabilistic reasoning: Insights from eliciting full distributions

Piers Douglas Lionel Howe, Andrew Perfors, Bradley Walker, Yoshihisa Kashima, Nicolas Fay

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Bayesian statistics offers a normative description for how a person should combine their original beliefs (i.e., their priors) in light of new evidence (i.e., the likelihood). Previous research suggests that people tend to under-weight both their prior (base rate neglect) and the likelihood (conservatism), although this varies by individual and situation. Yet this work generally elicits people’s knowledge as single point estimates (e.g., G has a 5% probability of occurring) rather than as a full distribution. Here we demonstrate the utility of eliciting and fitting full distributions when studying these questions. Across three experiments, we found substantial variation in the extent to which people showed base rate neglect and conservatism, which our method allowed us to measure for the first time simultaneously at the level of the individual. While most people tended to disregard the base rate, they did so less when the prior was made explicit. Although many individuals were conservative, there was no apparent systematic relationship between base rate neglect and conservatism within each individual. We suggest that this method shows great potential for studying human probabilistic reasoning.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)962-987
Number of pages26
JournalJudgment and Decision Making
Volume17
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Base rate neglect and conservatism in probabilistic reasoning: Insights from eliciting full distributions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this