Abstract
Brase (2002, Psychological
Review)
The
mental-model account of naive probabilistic reasoning by P. N. Johnson-Laird,
P. Legrenzi, V. Girotto, A. S. Legrenzi, and J.-P. Caverni (1999) provides an
opportunity to clarify several similarities and differences between it and
ecological rationality (frequentist) accounts. First, ambiguities in the
meaning of Bayesian reasoning can lead to disagreements and inappropriate
arguments. Second, 2 conflated effects of using natural frequencies are noticed
but not actually tested separately because of an artificial dissociation of
frequency representations and natural sampling. Third, similarities are noted
between the subset principle and the principle of natural sampling. Finally,
some potentially misleading portrayals of the role of evolutionary factors in
psychology are corrected. Mental-model theory, rather than better explaining
probabilistic reasoning, may be able to use frequency representations as a key
element in clarifying its own ambiguous constructs.