Pilditch, TD;
Hahn, U;
Fenton, N;
Lagnado, D;
(2020)
Dependencies in evidential reports: The case for informational advantages.
Cognition
, 204
, Article 104343. 10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104343.
Preview |
Text
Dependencies in evidence reports - Pilditch, Hahn, Fenton, Lagnado.pdf - Accepted Version Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Whether assessing the accuracy of expert forecasting, the pros and cons of group communication, or the value of evidence in diagnostic or predictive reasoning, dependencies between experts, group members, or evidence have traditionally been seen as a form of redundancy. We demonstrate that this conception of dependence conflates the structure of a dependency network, and the observations across this network. By disentangling these two elements we show, via mathematical proof and specific examples, that there are cases where dependencies yield an informational advantage over independence. More precisely, when a structural dependency exists, but observations are either partial or contradicting, these observations provide more support to a hypothesis than when this structural dependency does not exist, ceteris paribus. Furthermore, we show that lay reasoners endorse sufficient assumptions underpinning these advantageous structures yet fail to appreciate their implications for probability judgments and belief revision.
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
