The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fault trees: sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem representation
Abstract
Abstract : Fault trees represent problem situations by organizing things that could go wrong into functional categories. Such trees are essential devices for analyzing and evaluating the fallibility of complex systems. They follow many different formats, sometimes by design, other times inadvertently. Major results were: people were quite insensitive to what had been left out of a fault tree, increasing the amount of detail for the tree as a whole or just for some of its branches produced small effects on perceptions, and the perceived importance of a particular branch was increased by presenting it in pieces (as two separate component branches). Aside from their relevance for the study of problem solving, such results may have important implications for how best to inform the public about technological risks and to involve it in policy decisions and how experts should perform fault-tree analyses of the risks from technological systems.
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 [44]
Citations
Cites
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984
Axten, N., Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1973) · Contemporary Sociology A Journal of Reviews · doi:10.2307/2063712 · Cited by 6,886
Newell, A. (1972) · Cited by 6,222
Carroll, J. S., & Payne, J. W. (2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315802879 · Cited by 655
Cognitive Processes and Societal Risk Taking
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1976) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-010-1276-8_2 · Cited by 310
Self-citationAttribution Theory and Advertiser Credibility
Settle, R. B., & Golden, L. L. (1974) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377401100209 · Cited by 185
Combining information from sources that vary in credibility
Birnbaum, M. H., Wong, R., & Wong, L. K. (1976) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03213185 · Cited by 99
Cost benefit analysis and the art of motorcycle maintenance
Fischhoff, B. (1977) · Policy Sciences · doi:10.1007/bf01712294 · Cited by 95
Self-citationRepresentation of frequency in memory.
Howell, W. C. (1973) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/h0034648 · Cited by 68
Direct measures of availability and judgments of category frequency
Marom, T., & Fischhoff, B. (1977) · Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society · doi:10.3758/bf03336986 · Cited by 28
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293 · Cited by 3,991
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
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476
Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives.
Kahneman, D. J., & Miller, D. T. (1986) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.136 · Cited by 3,247
Metadata
- Authors
- Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
- Published
- 1978-05
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 330-344
- ISSN
- 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1277
- OpenAlex
- W2142405927
- Cited by
- 708
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 16.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Risk and Safety Analysis
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- fault trees, failure probability estimation, problem representation, risk perception, problem solving, expert opinion, risk analysis
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
