本文首先提出了Linda问题的概念范畴情境化视角。该视角认为,Linda问题中的T和F的范畴分别与T&F中T和F的范畴并不一定相同,当T&F中的T和F的范畴比相应的T与F单独呈现更大时,就有可能导致T&F>T或T&F>F为合理判断而非谬误的情形,因而至少不能将所有的T&F>T或T&F>F的判断都归为谬误。本文通过三项研究发现,被试对T&F中T与F和T与F的专业性判断确实不完全相同;排除作出女权的专业性合取事件<女权的专业性独立呈现且出纳的专业性合取事件<出纳的专业性独立呈现的判断者,所谓谬误水平显著下降;对Linda问题的排序项增加“专业的”限定词,以增加相应概念范畴的稳定性,显著减少合取谬误。这说明Linda问题的概念范畴情境化视角获得了支持。 This paper first proposes the conceptual context of Linda’s problem perspective. This perspective suggests that the categories of T and F in the Linda problem are not necessarily the same as the categories of T and F in T & F, respectively. When the categories of T and F in T & F are larger than the corresponding T and F alone, May lead to T & F> T or T & F> F is a reasonable judgment rather than a fallacy, so at least not all of the T & F> T or T & F> F judgment as a fallacy. In this study, we found that the subjects did not exactly match the professional judgment of T & F with T and F in T & F. The professional exclusion events that excluded feminist rights Taking events