Abstract
AbstractAlthough many researchers use Wagenaar's framework for understanding the factors that people use to determine whether a process is random, the framework has never undergone empirical scrutiny. This paper uses Wagenaar's framework as a starting point and examines the three properties of his framework—independence of events, fixed alternatives, and equiprobability. We find strong evidence to suggest that independence of events is indeed used as a cue toward randomness. Equiprobability has an effect on randomness judgments. However, it appears to work only in a limited role. Fixedness of alternatives is a complex construct that consists of multiple sub‐concepts. We find that each of these sub‐concepts influences randomness judgments, but that they exert forces in different directions. Stability of outcome ratios increases randomness judgments, while knowledge of outcome ratios decreases randomness judgments. Future directions for development of a functional framework for understanding perceptions of randomness are suggested. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
