Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reasoning and pragmatics

  • Articles
  • Published:
Mind & Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Language pragmatics is applied to analyse problem statements and instructions used in a few influential experimental tasks in the psychology of reasoning. This analysis aims to determine the interpretation of the task which the participant is likely to construct. It is applied to studies of deduction (where the interpretation of quantifiers and connectives is crucial) and to studies of inclusion judgment and probabilistic judgment. It is shown that the interpretation of the problem statements or even the representation of the task as a whole often turn out to differ from the experimenter's assumptions. This has serious consequences for the validity of these experimental results and therefore for the claims about human irrationality based on them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agnoli, F. & De Zuani, E. (1990) Fraintendimenti nel ragionamento probabilistico e implicazioni educative,Età evolutiva, 35, pp. 15–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombre, J.C. & Ducrot, O. (1983)L'argumentation dans la langue (Bruxelles, Mardaga).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel, M. (1990) Back to base rates, in R.M. Hogarth (Ed.)Insights in Decision Making (Chicago, University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Begg, I. & Harris, G. (1982) On the interpretation of syllogisms,Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, pp. 595–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brainerd, C.J. & Reyna, V.F. (1991) Inclusion fallacy: fuzzy trace theory and perceptual salience effects in cognitive development,Developmental Review, 10, pp. 365–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, R.M.J. (1989) Suppressing valid inferences with conditionals,Cognition, 31, pp. 61–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, D. & Chua, F. (1994) Suppression of valid inferences: Syntactic views, mental models, and relative salience,Cognition, 53, pp. 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, D.D., Lubart, T., Alkinis, O. & Rist, R. (1991) Conditional reasoning and causation,Memory and Cognition, 19, pp. 274–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casscells, W., Schoenberger, A. & Graboys, T.B. (1987) Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results,New England Journal Of Medicine, 229, pp. 999–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducrot, O. (1984)Le dire et le dit (Paris, Editions de Minuit).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dulany, D.E. & Hilton, D.J. (1991) Conversational implicature, conscious representation, and the conjunction fallacy,Social Cognition, 9(1), pp. 85–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler, K. (1988) The dependence of the conjunction fallacy on subtle linguistic factors,Psychological Research, 50, pp. 123–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (1991) On cognitive illusion and rationality, in E. Eells & T. Maruszewski (Eds.)Reasoning and Rationality. Essays in honour of L. J. Cohen (Amsterdam: Rodopi).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (1995) Why the distinction between single-event probabilities and frequencies is important for psychology (and vice versa), in G. Wright & P. Ayton (Eds.)Subjective probability (Chichester, John Wiley & Sons).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., Hell, W. & Blank, H. (1988) Presentation and content: the use of base rates as a continuous variable,Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perceptions and Performance, 14(3), pp. 513–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. & Hoffrage, U. (1995) How to improve bayesian reasoning without instruction: frequency formats,Psychological Review, 102, pp. 684–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginossar, Z. & Trope, Y. (1987) Problem solving in judgment under uncertainty,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, pp. 464–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Girotto, V. & Politzer, G. (1990) Conversational and world knowledge constraints on deductive reasoning, in J.P. Caverni, J.M. Fabre & M. Gonzales (Eds.)Cognitive biases (Amsterdam, North-Holland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1974)Frame analysis (New York, Harper & Row).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1981)Forms of talk (Oxford, Basil Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H.P. (1975) Logic and conversation, in P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.)Syntax and Semantics Vol. 3: Speech acts (New York, Academic Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, P. (1989)Studies in the way of words (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertwig, R. & Gigerenzer, G. (1997) The “conjunction fallacy” revisited: how intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors,Mimeo.

  • Hilton, D.J. (1995) The social context of reasoning: Conversational inference and rational judgment,Psychological Bulletin, 118, pp. 248–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilton, D.J., Jaspars, J.M.F. & Clarke, D.D. (1990) Pragmatic conditional reasoning: Context and content effects on the interpretation of causal assertions,Journal of Pragmatics, 14, pp. 791–812.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C.J. & Harris, P.L. (1987) Insight into the law of large numbers: a comparison of Piagetian and judment theory,Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34A, pp. 479–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. & Tversky, A. (Eds.) (1982)Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1973) On the psychology of prediction,Psychological Review, 80, pp. 237–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macchi, L. (1995) Pragmatics aspects of the base-rate fallacy,The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A(1), pp. 188–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macchi, L. (1998) Partitive formulation in probabilistic problems: beyond heuristics and frequency format explanations,The Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, in press.

  • Macchi, L. & Mosconi, G. (1998) Computational features vs frequentist phrasing in the base-rate fallacy,Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57(2), pp. 79–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, J.L. (1974),The cement of the universe (Oxford, Clarendon Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosconi, G. & Macchi, L. (1994) The role of pragmatic rules in the conjunction fallacy,Report University of Milan.

  • Newstead, S.E. & Griggs, R.A. (1983) Drawing inferences from quantified statements: A study of the square of opposition,Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, pp. 535–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. & Szeminska, A. (1941). La génèse du nombre chez l'enfant, (Neuchatel, G.N.).

  • Politzer, G. (1986). Laws of language use and formal logic,Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 15, pp. 47–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politzer, G. (1990). Immediate deduction between quantified sentences, in K.J. Gilhooly, M.T.G. Keane, R.H. Logie & G. Erdos (Eds.)Lines of thinking. Reflections on the psychology of thought (London, Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Politzer, G. (1993)La psychologie du raisonnement. Lois de la pragmatique et logique formelle. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Paris VIII.

  • Politzer, G. & Braine, M.D.S. (1991) Responses to inconsistent premisses cannot count as suppression of valid inferences,Cognition, 38, pp. 103–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politzer, G. & George, C. (1992) Non monotonic effects in conditional reasoning,Paper presented at the XXVth International Congress of Psychology, Brussels.

  • Politzer, G. & Noveck, I.A. (1991), Are conjunction rule violations the result of conversational rule violations?,Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 20, pp. 83–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N., Strack, F., Hilton, D. & Naderer, G. (1991) Base rates, representativeness, and the logic of conversation: the contextual relevance of “irrelevant” information,Social Cognition, 9(1), pp. 67–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipley, E.F. (1979) The class-inclusion task: question form and distributive comparison,Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 8, pp. 301–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D., Cara, F. & Girotto, V. (1995) Relevance theory explains the selection task,Cognition, 57, pp. 31–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperber, D. & Wilson, D. (1995)Relevance: Communication and cognition, 2nd edition (London, Blackwell).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1971) Belief in the Law of Small Numbers,Psychological Bulletin, 76, pp. 105–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1980) Causal schemas in judgments under uncertainty, in M. Fishbein (Ed.)Progress in Social Psychology, Vol. 1 (Hillsdale, Erlbaum).

  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1982) Evidential impact of base rates, in D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky (Eds.)Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment,Psychological Review, 90, pp. 293–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winefield, A.H. (1966) Negative recency and event dependence,Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, pp. 47–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winer, G.A. (1974) An analysis of verbal facilitation of classinclusion reasoning,Child Development, 51, pp. 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS-Psychologie Cognitive-2, Université de Paris VIII, rue de la Liberté, 93526, Saint-Denis, France

    Guy Politzer

  2. Dipartimento di Psicologia, Facoltà di Psicologia, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, viale Sarca, 202, 20126, Milano

    Laura Macchi

Authors
  1. Guy Politzer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Laura Macchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guy Politzer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Politzer, G., Macchi, L. Reasoning and pragmatics. Mind & Society 1, 73–93 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02512230

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02512230

Keywords

Search

Navigation