@article {Bonini:April 2004:0268-1064:199,
author = "Bonini N.",
author = "Tentori K.",
author = "Osherson D.",
title = "A Different Conjunction Fallacy",
journal = "Mind & Language",
volume = "19",
year = "April 2004",
abstract = ": Because the conjunction p-and-q implies p, the value of a bet on p-and-q cannot exceed the value of a bet on p at the same stakes. We tested recognition of this principle in a betting paradigm that (a) discouraged misreading p as p-and-not-q, and (b) encouraged genuinely conjunctive reading of p-and-q. Frequent violations were nonetheless observed. The findings appear to discredit the idea that most people spontaneously integrate the logic of conjunction into their assessments of chance.",
pages = "199-210(12)",
url = "http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bpl/mila/2004/00000019/00000002/art00004"
doi = "doi:10.1111/j.1468-0017.2004.00254.x"
}