You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Judgment of Coincidences: Mine versus Yours
The American Journal of Psychology
Vol. 102, No. 4 (Winter, 1989), pp. 477-493
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1423303
Page Count: 17
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Birthdays, Coincidence, Social psychology, Cognitive psychology, Probabilities, Personality psychology, Neighborhoods, Randomness, Experiment design, Random numbers
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Previous research indicated that subjects are not very surprised when reading coincidence stories, apparently because they regard the coincidence as one of many events that could have happened. This was true with respect to coincidences written by somebody else. However, there were indications that subjects found their own coincidences more surprising than those of others. The present study examines that egocentric bias and explores it further. In Experiment 1, a rotating design was employed in which the same story served, in turn, as self- and as other-coincidence, thereby controlling for the story's objective surprisingness. In Experiment 2, the coincidences occurred "spontaneously" in the course of the experiment, thus controlling for self-selection of subjectively surprising stories. Self-coincidences were judged more surprising than those of others in both experiments. The results suggest that the more personally meaningful the self-coincidence, the more surprising it is.
The American Journal of Psychology © 1989 University of Illinois Press