Abstract
When learning about the joint occurrence of different variables, individuals often manifest biases in the associations they infer. In some cases, they infer an association when none is present in the observed sample. In other cases, they infer an association that is contrary to the one that is in fact observed. These illusory correlations are often interpreted as being the byproduct of selective processing or as the outcome of an "illogical" pseudocontingency heuristic. More recently, a normative account of illusory correlations has been proposed, according to which they can be given a normative underpinning in terms of an application of Laplace's Rule of Succession. The present work will discuss the empirical and theoretical limitations associated with this normative account, and argue for its dismissal. As an alternative, we propose a normative account that casts illusory correlations as the expected outcome of a Bayesian reasoner relying on marginal frequencies. We show that this account succeeds in capturing the qualitative patterns found in a corpus of published studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
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.
