Corrigendum: How general is the natural frequency effect? The case of joint probabilities

A Corrigendum on
How general is the natural frequency effect? The case of joint probabilities

by Stegmüller, N., Binder, K., and Krauss, S. (2024). Front. Psychol. 15:1296359. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1296359

In the published article, there was an error in Figure 2 as published. In the left net diagram, it said “B and T+” (right, bottom), although it should be “nB and T+”. The corrected Figure 2 and its caption appear below.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Visualizations of two binary events in the context of the mammography problem: Probability versions (left) and frequency versions (right).³

The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way. The original article has been updated.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

3. ^Note that because of the plural “women” in our probability trees (e.g., in Figures 1, 2) these trees are basically percentage trees. However, since research in Bayesian reasoning mostly distinguishes between probability and frequency format, we call them probability trees.