TY - JOUR
T1 - Scientific deduction--evidence is not necessarily informative
T2 - A reply to Wells and Harvey
AU - Borgida, Eugene
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2013 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 1978/5
Y1 - 1978/5
N2 - G. L. Wells and J. H. Harvey (1977) have questioned the cogency of R. E. Nisbett and E. Borgida's (see record 1976-04569-001) argument that people ignore consensus information when making predictions and attributions. It is argued that Wells and Harvey have misinterpreted the meaning of D. Kahneman and A. Tversky's (see record 1976-02325-001) work on the psychology of prediction. It is also argued that Wells and Harvey's own data actually show a dramatic underutilization of consensus information in prediction and much less than optimal utilization for attribution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
AB - G. L. Wells and J. H. Harvey (1977) have questioned the cogency of R. E. Nisbett and E. Borgida's (see record 1976-04569-001) argument that people ignore consensus information when making predictions and attributions. It is argued that Wells and Harvey have misinterpreted the meaning of D. Kahneman and A. Tversky's (see record 1976-02325-001) work on the psychology of prediction. It is also argued that Wells and Harvey's own data actually show a dramatic underutilization of consensus information in prediction and much less than optimal utilization for attribution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
KW - J. H. Harvey's criticism
KW - attributions, reply to G. L. Wells &
KW - underutilization of consensus information in making predictions &
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/58149405465
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/58149405465#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1037//0022-3514.36.5.477
DO - 10.1037//0022-3514.36.5.477
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:58149405465
SN - 0022-3514
VL - 36
SP - 477
EP - 482
JO - Journal of personality and social psychology
JF - Journal of personality and social psychology
IS - 5
ER -