These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29220640)

  • 1. Invariants in probabilistic reasoning.
    Costello F; Watts P
    Cogn Psychol; 2018 Feb; 100():1-16. PubMed ID: 29220640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. People's conditional probability judgments follow probability theory (plus noise).
    Costello F; Watts P
    Cogn Psychol; 2016 Sep; 89():106-33. PubMed ID: 27570097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Surprising rationality in probability judgment: Assessing two competing models.
    Costello F; Watts P; Fisher C
    Cognition; 2018 Jan; 170():280-297. PubMed ID: 29096329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Surprisingly rational: probability theory plus noise explains biases in judgment.
    Costello F; Watts P
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Jul; 121(3):463-80. PubMed ID: 25090427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Probability theory plus noise: Replies to Crupi and Tentori (2016) and to Nilsson, Juslin, and Winman (2016).
    Costello F; Watts P
    Psychol Rev; 2016 Jan; 123(1):112-23. PubMed ID: 26709415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Probability Theory Plus Noise: Descriptive Estimation and Inferential Judgment.
    Costello F; Watts P
    Top Cogn Sci; 2018 Jan; 10(1):192-208. PubMed ID: 29383882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Random variation and systematic biases in probability estimation.
    Howe R; Costello F
    Cogn Psychol; 2020 Dec; 123():101306. PubMed ID: 33189032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Heuristics can produce surprisingly rational probability estimates: Comment on Costello and Watts (2014).
    Nilsson H; Juslin P; Winman A
    Psychol Rev; 2016 Jan; 123(1):103-11. PubMed ID: 26709414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Précis of bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning.
    Oaksford M; Chater N
    Behav Brain Sci; 2009 Feb; 32(1):69-84; discussion 85-120. PubMed ID: 19210833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Bayesian sampler: Generic Bayesian inference causes incoherence in human probability judgments.
    Zhu JQ; Sanborn AN; Chater N
    Psychol Rev; 2020 Oct; 127(5):719-748. PubMed ID: 32191073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The ecological rationality of explanatory reasoning.
    Douven I
    Stud Hist Philos Sci; 2020 Feb; 79():1-14. PubMed ID: 32072922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A description-experience gap in statistical intuitions: Of smart babies, risk-savvy chimps, intuitive statisticians, and stupid grown-ups.
    Schulze C; Hertwig R
    Cognition; 2021 May; 210():104580. PubMed ID: 33667974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A quantum probability framework for human probabilistic inference.
    Trueblood JS; Yearsley JM; Pothos EM
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2017 Sep; 146(9):1307-1341. PubMed ID: 28682091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Probability theory, not the very guide of life.
    Juslin P; Nilsson H; Winman A
    Psychol Rev; 2009 Oct; 116(4):856-74. PubMed ID: 19839686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Naive probability: a mental model theory of extensional reasoning.
    Johnson-Laird PN; Legrenzi P; Girotto V; Legrenzi MS; Caverni JP
    Psychol Rev; 1999 Jan; 106(1):62-88. PubMed ID: 10197363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A quantum theory account of order effects and conjunction fallacies in political judgments.
    Yearsley JM; Trueblood JS
    Psychon Bull Rev; 2018 Aug; 25(4):1517-1525. PubMed ID: 28879495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bridging the gap between subjective probability and probability judgments: The quantum sequential sampler.
    Huang J; Busemeyer JR; Ebelt Z; Pothos EM
    Psychol Rev; 2024 Sep; ():. PubMed ID: 39298226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Noisy probability judgment, the conjunction fallacy, and rationality: Comment on Costello and Watts (2014).
    Crupi V; Tentori K
    Psychol Rev; 2016 Jan; 123(1):97-102. PubMed ID: 26709413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A decision network account of reasoning about other people's choices.
    Jern A; Kemp C
    Cognition; 2015 Sep; 142():12-38. PubMed ID: 26010559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Deduction, Induction and the Art of Clinical Reasoning in Medical Education: Systematic Review and Bayesian Proposal.
    de-Sousa MR; Aguiar TRX
    Arq Bras Cardiol; 2022 Oct; 119(5 suppl 1):27-34. PubMed ID: 36449956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.