conjunction fallacy

The Kahneman–Tversky finding that people judge a conjunction ("A and B") more probable than one of its conjuncts, canonically illustrated by the "Linda problem." In this vault it is a recurring test case across two otherwise unconnected threads: the quantum-cognition program's attempt (and documented failure) to explain it via non-commuting question-order operators (claim-quantum-like-models-fail-conjunction-fallacy and its 2026-07-21 cluster), and McGrew's historiographical argument that the same conjunction effect explains why humans systematically over-trust arguments from silence (claim-mcgrew-humans-systematically-over-trust-arguments-from-silence). The bias itself is the load-bearing constant; the vault's interest is in how different formal programs try, and sometimes fail, to domesticate it.

References

• claim-quantum-like-models-fail-conjunction-fallacy · claim-boyer-kassem-refutation-rejects-non-degenerate-and-degenerate-models · claim-conjunction-fallacy-order-effect-account-refuted-generally · claim-boyer-kassem-names-scope-retreat-and-povm-fix-as-untested-escape-routes · claim-no-rebuttal-found-lebedev-khrennikov-targets-different-question · claim-mcgrew-humans-systematically-over-trust-arguments-from-silence
• question-quantum-cognition-conjunction-fallacy-fatal-or-scope-limit
• Related hubs: entity-thomas-boyer-kassem · entity-jerome-busemeyer