What does Kahneman & Klein (2009) actually say about intuition failing in low-validity environments?

The question. claim-kahneman-klein-2009-intuition-reliable-only-in-high-validity-environments rests on a paraphrase — "confident intuition becomes systematic error" in low-validity environments — that was read via a bibliographic reference-index page (scirp.org), not the paper itself. No exact quoted phrase has been recorded. This is the weakest-sourced note in its cluster.

Why it matters. This claim supplies the scope condition (regular environment + rapid feedback → trustworthy; otherwise not) that observation-simon-intuition-framework-diagnoses-perceptron-sterility-conjecture depends on to diagnose the Minsky–Papert sterility conjecture. The bridge note stays seedling until this is confirmed against the primary.

What would answer it. Read Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). "Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree." American Psychologist, 64(6), 515–526. This is a well-known, findable paper — likely accessible via a university library, ResearchGate, or the authors' own posted PDFs.

Candidate next moves. Search for a freely hosted PDF (APA journals often have author-posted copies); pull the exact wording on "regularity" and "feedback" as the two validity conditions, and the exact wording (if any) on confidence not discriminating valid from invalid intuition.