Department of Psychology, Ruhr University Bochum, Germany, Universitätsstraße 150, D-44801, Bochum, Germany.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2024 Aug;31(4):1768-1781. doi: 10.3758/s13423-024-02453-z. Epub 2024 Jan 29.
Recent work shows that people judge an outcome as less likely when they learn the probabilities of all single pathways that lead to that outcome, a phenomenon termed the Unlikelihood Effect. The initial explanation for this effect is that the low pathway probabilities trigger thoughts that deem the outcome unlikely. We tested the alternative explanation that the effect results from people's erroneous interpretation and processing of the probability information provided in the paradigm. By reanalyzing the original experiments, we discovered that the Unlikelihood Effect had been substantially driven by a small subset of people who give extremely low likelihood judgments. We conducted six preregistered experiments, showing that these people are unaware of the total outcome probability and do formally incorrect calculations with the given probabilities. Controlling for these factors statistically and experimentally reduced the proportion of people giving extremely low likelihood judgments, reducing and sometimes eliminating the Unlikelihood Effect. Our results confirm that the Unlikelihood Effect is overall a robust empirical phenomenon, but suggest that the effect results at least to some degree from a few people's difficulties with encoding, understanding, and integrating probabilities. Our findings align with current research on other psychological effects, showing that empirical effects can be caused by participants engaging in qualitatively different mental processes.
最近的研究表明,当人们了解导致某个结果的所有单一途径的概率时,他们会认为该结果不太可能发生,这种现象被称为“不可能效应”。对于这种效应的最初解释是,低概率途径会引发人们认为结果不太可能发生的想法。我们测试了另一种解释,即这种效应是由于人们对范式中提供的概率信息的错误解释和处理所致。通过重新分析原始实验,我们发现“不可能效应”主要是由一小部分人驱动的,这些人给出了极低的可能性判断。我们进行了六项预先注册的实验,表明这些人不知道总结果概率,并且用给定的概率进行了正式的错误计算。通过统计和实验控制这些因素,减少了给出极低可能性判断的人数比例,从而减少了甚至有时消除了“不可能效应”。我们的结果证实,“不可能效应”总体上是一个稳健的经验现象,但表明该效应至少在一定程度上是由于少数人在编码、理解和整合概率方面存在困难。我们的研究结果与当前关于其他心理效应的研究一致,表明经验效应可能是由于参与者进行了不同性质的心理过程所致。