Comments on "Getting scarred and winning lotteries: Effects of exemplar cuing and statistical format on imagining low-probability events," by Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (2008)

Jonathan J. Koehler, Laura Macchi

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    3 Scopus citations

    Abstract

    Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (NMH) conduct three experiments designed to test whether exemplar cuing (EC) theory or a statistical format theory provides a more accurate account for how people make judgments about low-probability events. They report finding support for the statistical format theory and little or no support for EC. However, NMH misstate the requirements for the production of exemplars in EC theory. As a result, they confuse non-exemplar conditions with exemplar conditions in their experiments, and find results that are virtually irrelevant to EC theory.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)523-527
    Number of pages5
    JournalJournal of Behavioral Decision Making
    Volume22
    Issue number5
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Dec 2009

    Keywords

    • Exemplar cuing
    • Exemplars
    • Imaginability
    • Low-probability events

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Decision Sciences(all)
    • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
    • Applied Psychology
    • Sociology and Political Science
    • Strategy and Management

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comments on "Getting scarred and winning lotteries: Effects of exemplar cuing and statistical format on imagining low-probability events," by Newell, Mitchell, and Hayes (2008)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this