I am working on a problem set and I am having some difficulty wrapping my head around a concept introduced by Tversky and Kahneman. My problem set asks the question "Why does anchoring nevertheless often yield correct judgment?"
Based on their paper, I thought they were trying to say that anchoring often yields incorrect judgment. I've been thinking about it more and I'm not sure if I'm headed in the right direction.
Something they state in their paper is that people tend to overestimate conjunctive events and underestimate disjunctive events. Disjunctive events are associated with risk evaluation. As given by their example, a complex system, such as the human body, will malfunction if any of the essential components fail. Even if the liklihood of failure is slight, the probability of overall failure is high if many components are involved, however people tend to understimate the rate of failure in disjunctive events.
However, I believe that in this situation, anchoring does yield correct judgement because people do not think about the highly complex structures that the human body is made of. For the most part, we have control over our health and we can prevent from components of our bodies from failing. So by living healthy lives, we are more likely to live longer, therefore decreasing the chances of actual failure.
I don't know if I am on the right path or if my logic is off in my interpretation above.