Psychological Development and Education ›› 2006, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (4): 29-34.

Previous Articles     Next Articles

An Experimental Study on the Influence of Representation on the Resolving of Three Doors Problem

WANG Bao-xi, XIANG Ling, ZHANG Qing-lin   

  1. School of Psychology, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715
  • Online:2006-10-15 Published:2006-10-15

Abstract: By designing four treatments, the experiment studied the influence of representation on the resolving of the three doors problem and its transfer.The results indicated that: (1) there are several reasons that make the three doors problem hard such as regret, the illusion of control, the misrepresentation of the problem space, etc., but the misrepresentation is the most important reason; (2) clear representation of the logical relation between the contestant and the host is the key of resolving three doors problems.The frequent form representation based on logical logic relation representation enhances the resolution of three doors problems; (3) the participants who acquire the correct experience from frequent form representation can resolve the transfer whether it is similar in content or in structure.

Key words: the three doors problem, representation,transfer

[1] Tuban E,Alonson D.Overcoming illusory inferences in a probabilistic counterintuitive problem:the role of explicit representations.Memory &Cognition 2003,31(4):596-607.
[2] Granberg D.Cross-cultural comparison of responses to the Monty Hall dilemma.Social Behavior and Personality,1999,27(4):431-438.
[3] Franco-Watkins A M,Derks P L,Dougherty,M R P.Reasoning in the Monty Hall problem:Examining choice behaviour and probability judgments.Thinking and Reasoning,2003,9(1):67-90.
[4] Fox C R,Levan J.Partition-Edit-Count:Extensional Reasoning in Judgment of conditional Probability.Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,2004,133(4):626-642.
[5] Burns B D,Wieth M.The collider principle in causal reasoning:why the Monty Hall dilemma is so hard.Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,2004,133(3):434-449.
[6] Krauss S,Wang X T.The psychology of the Monty Hall problem:Discovering psychological mechanisms for solving a tenacious brain teaser.Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,2003,132(1):3-22.
[7] Gigerenzer G,Hoffrage U.How to improve beyesian reasoning without instruction:frequency formats.Psychological Review.1995,102 (4):684-704.
[8] 傅小兰,赵晓东.信息表征形式对解决贝叶斯推理问题的影响心理与行为研究,2005,3(2):109-115.
[9] Evans J St B T,Handley S J,Perham N,Over,etal.Frequency versus probability formats in statistical word problems.Cognition,2000,77;197-213.
[10] Girotto V,Gonzales G.Solving probabilistic and statistical problems:a matter of information structure and question form.Cognition,2001,78; 247-276.
[11] Hoffrage U,Gigerenzer G,Krauss S,etal.Representation facilitates reasoning:what natural frequencies are and what they are not.Cognition 2002,84:343-352.
[12] Granberg D,Brown T A.The Monty Hall dilemma.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.1995,21(7):711-723.
[13] Granberg D,Dorr N.Further exploration of two-stage decision making in the Monty Hall dilemma.American Journal of Psychology,1998,111:561-579.
[14] Johnson-Laird P N,Legrenzi P,Girotto V,etal.Naive probability:A mental model theory of extensional reasoning.Psychological Review,1999,106(1):62-88.
[15] Gigerenzer G,包燕.生态学智力:人类的推理算法对频率的适应.心理学动态,2001,9(4):325-329.
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!