Many biases have been observed in probabilistic reasoning, hindering t
he ability to follow normative rules in decision-making contexts invol
ving uncertainty. One systematic error people make is to neglect base
rates in situations where prior beliefs in a hypothesis should be take
n into account when new evidence is obtained. Incomplete explanations
for the phenomenon have impeded the development of effective debiasing
procedures or tools to support decision making in this area. In this
research, we show that the main reason behind these judgment errors is
the causal representation induced by the problem context. In two expe
riments we demonstrate that people often possess the appropriate decis
ion rules but are unable to apply them correctly because they have an
ineffective causal mental representation. We also show how this mental
representation may be modified when a graph is used instead of a prob
lem narrative. This new understanding should contribute to the design
of better decision aids to overcome this bias.