The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1,086 of the 1,090 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability
Abstract
This article presents a new theory of subjective probability according to which different descriptions of the same event can give rise to different judgments. The experimental evidence confirms the major predictions of the theory. First, judged probability increases by unpacking the focal hypothesis and decreases by unpacking the alternative hypothesis. Second, judged probabilities are complementary in the binary case and subadditive in the general case, contrary to both classical and revisionist models of belief. Third, subadditivity is more pronounced for probability judgments than for frequency judgments and is enhanced by compatible evidence. The theory provides a unified treatment of a wide range of empirical findings. It is extended to ordinal judgments and to the assessment of upper and lower probabilities. Both laypeople and experts are often called upon to evaluate the probability of uncertain events such as the outcome of a trial, the result of a medical operation, the success of a business venture, or the winner of a football game. Such assessments play an important role in deciding, respectively, whether to go to court, undergo surgery, invest in the venture, or bet on the home team. Uncertainty is usually expressed in verbal terms (e.g., unlikely or probable), but numerical estimates are also common. Weather forecasters, for example, often report the probability of rain (Murphy, 1985), and economists are sometimes required to estimate the chances of recession (Zarnowitz, 1985). The theoretical and practical significance of subjective probability has inspired psychologists, philosophers, and statisticians to investigate this notion from both descriptive and prescriptive standpoints.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In the unpacking effect, participants judge, say, 'being a lawyer', to be less probable than the 'unpacked' description 'being a tax, corporate, patent, or other type of lawyer' [44][45][46].”
From Bayesian Brains without Probabilities (2016) · cites this paper as [45]
In the citing paper
“when guided to where the peaks are (i.e., starting the android from a different location), for example, by being asked about the pattern _ _ _ _ ing in the more detailed description, then large peaks are found and probability estimates are higher [31,45].”
From Bayesian Brains without Probabilities (2016) · cites this paper as [45]
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Self-citationSelf-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
An inventory for measuring depression
BECK, A. T. (1961) · Archives of General Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archpsyc.1961.01710120031004 · Cited by 38,032
(1975) · PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) · Cited by 36,737
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,720
Self-citationThe satisfaction with life scale
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985) · Journal of Personality Assessment · doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 · Cited by 31,768
James, W. (1891) · Personality Culture Society · doi:10.1037/11059-000 · Cited by 25,876
The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.117.3.497 · Cited by 23,245
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/002205102320161311 · Cited by 6,106
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540
Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00003435 · Cited by 4,481
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
Bottom, W. P., Gilovich, T. D., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. J. (2004) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/20159081 · Cited by 3,583
(1993)
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.025 · Cited by 2,349
(2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098 · Cited by 2,293
Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development.
Murphy, M., Black, Lamping, McKee, M., Sanderson, Askham, & Marteau (1998) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta2030 · Cited by 2,076
Developments in Non-Expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk
Starmer, C. (2000) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.38.2.332 · Cited by 1,885
The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence
Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (1992) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90013-r · Cited by 1,866
Self-citationRepresentativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476
On the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function
Gonzalez, R., & Wu, G. (1999) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1998.0710 · Cited by 1,396
Perspective Taking as Egocentric Anchoring and Adjustment.
Nicholas Epley, A., Keysar, B., Leaf Van Boven, A., & Gilovich, T. D. (2004) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.327 · Cited by 1,316
Consumer Perceptions of Price (Un)Fairness
Bolton, L. E., Warlop, L., & Alba, J. W. (2003) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/346244 · Cited by 1,077
On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky.
Gigerenzer, G. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.592 · Cited by 1,098
Achieving Quality in Clinical Decision Making: Cognitive Strategies and Detection of Bias
Croskerry, P. (2002) · Academic Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.2002.tb01574.x · Cited by 938
Weighing risk and uncertainty.
Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.2.269 · Cited by 995
Self-citationDoes Living in California Make People Happy? A Focusing Illusion in Judgments of Life Satisfaction
Schkade, D. A., & Kahneman, D. J. (1998) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00066 · Cited by 885
MAPS OF BOUNDED RATIONALITY: A PERSPECTIVE ON INTUITIVE JUDGMENT AND CHOICE
Kahneman, D. J. (2003) · Cited by 860
Knowledge Calibration: What Consumers Know and What They Think They Know
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (2000) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/314317 · Cited by 832
Statistical Methods for Eliciting Probability Distributions
Garthwaite, P. H., Kadane, J. B., & O’Hagan, A. (2005) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/016214505000000105 · Cited by 826
Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask
Klayman, J., Soll, J. B., Gonzalez-Vallejo, C. C., & Barlas, S. (1999) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1999.2847 · Cited by 787
Stewart, N., Chater, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.10.003 · Cited by 737
Mindful Judgment and Decision Making
Weber, E. U., & Johnson, E. J. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163633 · Cited by 782
Two-stage dynamic signal detection: A theory of choice, decision time, and confidence.
Pleskac, T. J., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2010) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0019737 · Cited by 722
Advice taking in decision making: egocentric discounting and reputation formation
Yaniv, I., & Kleinberger, E. (2000) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2909 · Cited by 701
Dunning, D. A., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.020 · Cited by 689
Discounting Time and Time Discounting: Subjective Time Perception and Intertemporal Preferences
Zauberman, G. S., Kim, B. K., Malkoc, S. A., & Bettman, J. R. (2009) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.46.4.543 · Cited by 639
The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation
Abdellaoui, M., Baillon, A., Placido, L., & Wakker, P. (2011) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.101.2.695 · Cited by 586
Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision
Busemeyer, J. R., Wang, Z., & Pothos, E. (2015) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199957996.013.17 · Cited by 550
Problems for Judgment and Decision Making
Hastie, R. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.653 · Cited by 536
Security and Game Theory: Algorithms, Deployed Systems, Lessons Learned
Tambe, M. (2011) · Cited by 509
Marx, S. M., Weber, E. U., Orlove, B., Leiserowitz, A., Krantz, D. H., Roncoli, C., & Phillips, J. A. (2006) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.10.004 · Cited by 532
Gennaioli, N., & Shleifer, A. (2010) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/qjec.2010.125.4.1399 · Cited by 479
Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases.
Fiedler, K. (2000) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.107.4.659 · Cited by 480
Seeing the forest when entry is unlikely: Probability and the mental representation of events.
Wakslak, C. J., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Alony, R. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.641 · Cited by 496
Situated Optimism: Specific Outcome Expectancies and Self-Regulation
Armor, D. A., & Taylor, S. E. (1998) · Advances in experimental social psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60386-x · Cited by 462
Is Time-Discounting Hyperbolic or Subadditive?
Read, D. (2001) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1023/a:1011198414683 · Cited by 447
Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling?
Pothos, E. M., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2013) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x12001525 · Cited by 475
Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory.
Rottenstreich, Y., & Tversky, A. (1997) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.104.2.406 · Cited by 446
Self-citationIncorporating the Irrelevant: Anchors in Judgments of Belief and Value
Chapman, G. B., & Johnson, E. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.008 · Cited by 424
Sloman, S. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.024 · Cited by 412
A quantum theoretical explanation for probability judgment errors.
Busemeyer, J. R., Pothos, E. M., Franco, R., & Trueblood, J. S. (2011) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0022542 · Cited by 417
Future thought and behaviour change
Oettingen, G. (2012) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463283.2011.643698 · Cited by 504
A Belief-Based Account of Decision Under Uncertainty
Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1998) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.44.7.879 · Cited by 400
Self-citationOlsen, R. A., & Cox, C. M. (2001) · Journal of Behavioral Finance · doi:10.1207/s15327760jpfm0201_3 · Cited by 373
When less is more: Counterfactual thinking and satisfaction among Olympic medalists.
Medvec, V. H., Madey, S. F., & Gilovich, T. D. (1995) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.69.4.603 · Cited by 526
Brewer, N., & Wells, G. L. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.12.1.11 · Cited by 390
The motivating function of thinking about the future: Expectations versus fantasies.
Oettingen, G., & Mayer, D. (2002) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.83.5.1198 · Cited by 547
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
(2013) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/11166.1573-0476 · Cited by 374
The accentuated CEO career horizon problem: evidence from international acquisitions
Matta, E., & Beamish, P. W. (2008) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.680 · Cited by 365
Stress, Cognition, and Human Performance: A Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
Staal, M. A. (2013) · Cited by 346
Navigating by the Stars: Investigating the Actual and Perceived Validity of Online User Ratings
de Langhe, B., Fernbach, P. M., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (2015) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1093/jcr/ucv047 · Cited by 329
Bayesian Brains without Probabilities
Sanborn, A. N., & Chater, N. (2016) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2016.10.003 · Cited by 307
Abdellaoui, M., Voßmann, F., & Weber, M. (2005) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0388 · Cited by 313
Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., & Cooke, A. D. J. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.447 · Cited by 332
Shafir, E., & LeBoeuf, R. A. (2002) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135213 · Cited by 317
Introduction – Heuristics and Biases: Then and Now
Gilovich, T. D., & Griffin, D. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.002 · Cited by 312
Naive probability: A mental model theory of extensional reasoning.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., Legrenzi, P., Girotto, V., Legrenzi, M. S., & Caverni, J.-P. (1999) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.106.1.62 · Cited by 305
Hilbert, M. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0025940 · Cited by 391
Norm Theory: Comparing Reality to Its Alternatives
Kahneman, D. J., & Miller, D. T. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.022 · Cited by 285
Managerial decision-making under crisis: The role of emotion in an intuitive decision process
Sayegh, L., Anthony, W. P., & Perrewé, P. L. (2004) · Human Resource Management Review · doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2004.05.002 · Cited by 318
Quantum cognition: A new theoretical approach to psychology
Bruza, P. D., Wang, Z., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2015) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2015.05.001 · Cited by 273
The Effect of Construal Level on Subjective Probability Estimates
Wakslak, C. J., & Yaacov Trope, B. (2008) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02250.x · Cited by 281
Nonlinear Decision Weights in Choice Under Uncertainty
Wu, G., & Gonzalez, R. (1999) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.45.1.74 · Cited by 286
Reyna, V. F., & Lloyd, F. J. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.12.3.179 · Cited by 280
Fiedler, K. (2007) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/s1057-7408(07)70015-3 · Cited by 258
Fox, C. R., & Clemen, R. T. (2005) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0409 · Cited by 259
How to define and measure risk perceptions
Wolff, K., Larsen, S., & Øgaard, T. (2019) · Annals of Tourism Research · doi:10.1016/j.annals.2019.102759 · Cited by 285
Harvey, N. (1997) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(97)01014-0 · Cited by 239
Verbal and Numerical Expressions of Probability: “It's a Fifty–Fifty Chance”
de Bruin, W. B., Fischhoff, B., Millstein, S. G., & Halpern‐Felsher, B. L. (2000) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1999.2868 · Cited by 246
Partition Priming in Judgment Under Uncertainty
Fox, C. R., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2003) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.02431 · Cited by 245
What Determines the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function Under Uncertainty?
Kilka, M., & Weber, M. (2001) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.47.12.1712.10239 · Cited by 240
Self-confidence and metacognitive processes
Kleitman, S., & Stankov, L. (2007) · Learning and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.03.004 · Cited by 265
How Disaggregation Enhances the Credibility of Management Earnings Forecasts
Hirst, D. E., Koonce, L. L., & Venkataraman, S. (2007) · Journal of Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/j.1475-679x.2007.00252.x · Cited by 234
The probability of causal conditionals
Over, D. E., Hadjichristidis, C., Evans, J. S. B. T., Handley, S. J., & Sloman, S. A. (2007) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.05.002 · Cited by 229
Frederick, S., Novemsky, N., Wang, J., Dhar, R., & Nowlis, S. (2009) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/599764 · Cited by 321
Compatibility Effects in Judgment and Choice
Slovic, P., Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.014 · Cited by 235
Self-citationMonahan, J. T., & Steadman, H. J. (1996) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.51.9.931 · Cited by 224
Fuzzy-Trace Theory: Dual Processes in Memory, Reasoning, and Cognitive Neuroscience
Brainerd, C. J., & Reyna, V. F. (2002) · Advances in child development and behavior · doi:10.1016/s0065-2407(02)80062-3 · Cited by 234
A Penny for Your Thoughts: A Survey of Methods for Eliciting Beliefs
Schlag, K. H., Tremewan, J., & van der Weele, J. J. (2013) · Experimental Economics · doi:10.1007/s10683-014-9416-x · Cited by 229
Myopic Social Prediction and the Solo Comparison Effect.
Moore, D. A., & Kim, T. G. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1121 · Cited by 224
The ‘Heuristics and Biases’ Bias in Expert Elicitation
Kynn, M. (2007) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2007.00499.x · Cited by 228
Psychology, Financial Decision Making, and Financial Crises
Gärling, T., Kirchler, E. M., Lewis, A., & van Raaij, F. (2009) · Gothic.net · doi:10.1177/1529100610378437 · Cited by 260
Errors in probabilistic reasoning and judgment biases
Benjamin, D. J. (2019) · Handbook of behavioral economics · doi:10.1016/bs.hesbe.2018.11.002 · Cited by 241
Options traders exhibit subadditive decision weights
Fox, C. R., Rogers, B. A., & Tversky, A. (1996) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00055335 · Cited by 218
Self-citationA Truth Serum for Non-Bayesians: Correcting Proper Scoring Rules for Risk Attitudes
Offerman, T., Sonnemans, J., van de Kuilen, G., & Wakker, P. P. (2009) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-937x.2009.00557.x · Cited by 218
Diagnostic hypothesis generation and human judgment.
Thomas, R. P., Dougherty, M. R. P., Sprenger, A. M., & Harbison, J. I. (2008) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.115.1.155 · Cited by 231
Quantitative applications in the social sciences
(1981) · Social Science Information Studies · doi:10.1016/0143-6236(81)90010-7 · Cited by 218
Ambiguity Aversion, Comparative Ignorance, and Decision Context
Fox, C. R., & Weber, M. (2002) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2990 · Cited by 226
Decision theory with prospect interference and entanglement
Yukalov, V. I., & Sornette, D. (2010) · Theory and Decision · doi:10.1007/s11238-010-9202-y · Cited by 209
Schwarz, N., & Vaughn, L. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.007 · Cited by 215
When Predictions Fail: The Dilemma of Unrealistic Optimism
Armor, D. A., & Taylor, S. E. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.021 · Cited by 211
The naïve intuitive statistician: A naïve sampling model of intuitive confidence intervals.
Juslin, P., Winman, A., & Hansson, P. (2007) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.114.3.678 · Cited by 208
Bolton, J. E., & Wilkinson, R. C. (1998) · PubMed · Cited by 208
Probability Judgment in Medicine
Redelmeier, D. A., Koehler, D. J., Liberman, V., & Tversky, A. (1995) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x9501500305 · Cited by 211
Self-citationWindschitl, P. D., Kruger, J., & Simms, E. N. (2003) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.3.389 · Cited by 204
Pita, J., Jain, M., Tambe, M., Ordóñez, F., & Kraus, S. (2010) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.artint.2010.07.002 · Cited by 207
A Socioemotional Wealth Approach to CEO Career Horizons in Family Firms
Strike, V. M., Berrone, P., Sapp, S. G., & Congiu, L. (2015) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/joms.12123 · Cited by 202
The Role of Emotion in Economic BehaviorPreprint
Rick, S. I., & Loewenstein, G. F. (2007) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.954862 · Cited by 202
Metadata
- Authors
- Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- ORCID
- Koehler, Derek J.
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 1994-10
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 547-567
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W2054875343
- Cited by
- 1,167
- References
- 1,090
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 52
- FWCI
- 10.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Keywords
- subjective probability, support theory, subadditivity, alternative hypothesis, lower and upper probabilities, probability judgment, frequency judgment, belief revision
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
