↓ Skip to main content

The Influence of Initial Beliefs on Judgments of Probability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Influence of Initial Beliefs on Judgments of Probability
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00381
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erica C. Yu, David A. Lagnado

Abstract

This study aims to investigate whether experimentally induced prior beliefs affect processing of evidence including the updating of beliefs under uncertainty about the unknown probabilities of outcomes and the structural, outcome-generating nature of the environment. Participants played a gambling task in the form of computer-simulated slot machines and were given information about the slot machines' possible outcomes without their associated probabilities. One group was induced with a prior belief about the outcome space that matched the space of actual outcomes to be sampled; the other group was induced with a skewed prior belief that included the actual outcomes and also fictional higher outcomes. In reality, however, all participants sampled evidence from the same underlying outcome distribution, regardless of priors given. Before and during sampling, participants expressed their beliefs about the outcome distribution (values and probabilities). Evaluation of those subjective probability distributions suggests that all participants' judgments converged toward the observed outcome distribution. However, despite observing no supporting evidence for fictional outcomes, a significant proportion of participants in the skewed priors condition expected them in the future. A probe of the participants' understanding of the underlying outcome-generating processes indicated that participants' judgments were based on the information given in the induced priors and consequently, a significant proportion of participants in the skewed condition believed the slot machines were not games of chance while participants in the control condition believed the machines generated outcomes at random. Beyond Bayesian or heuristic belief updating, priors not only contribute to belief revision but also affect one's deeper understanding of the environment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 41 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 41%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 12 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2013.
All research outputs
#7,694,776
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#11,123
of 31,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,838
of 247,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#193
of 482 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 247,622 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 482 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.