|Abstract||Sperber, Cara, and Girotto (1995) argued that, in Wason's selection task, relevance-guided comprehension processes tend to determine participants' performance and pre-empt the use of other inferential capacities. Because of this, the value of the selection task as a tool for studying human inference has been grossly overestimated. Fiddick, Cosmides, and Tooby (2000) argued against Sperber et al. that specialized inferential mechanisms, in particular the “social contract algorithm” hypothesized by Cosmides (1989), pre-empt more general comprehension abilities, making the selection task a useful tool after all. We rebut this argument. We argue and illustrate with two new experiments, that Fiddick et al. mix the true Wason selection task with a trivially simple categorization task superficially similar to the Wason task, yielding methodologically flawed evidence. We conclude that the extensive use of various kinds of selection tasks in the psychology of reasoning has been quite counter-productive and should be discontinued|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Mike Oaksford (1998). Discussion Task Demands and Revising Probabilities in the Selection Task: A Comment on Green, Over, and Pyne. Thinking and Reasoning 4 (2):179 – 186.
David Hardman (1998). Does Reasoning Occur on the Selection Task? A Comparison of Relevance-Based Theories. Thinking and Reasoning 4 (4):353 – 376.
Pascal Wagner-Egger (2007). Conditional Reasoning and the Wason Selection Task: Biconditional Interpretation Instead of Reasoning Bias. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (4):484 – 505.
Raymond S. Nickerson (1996). Hempel's Paradox and Wason's Selection Task: Logical and Psychological Puzzles of Confirmation. Thinking and Reasoning 2 (1):1 – 31.
Hiroshi Yama (2001). Matching Versus Optimal Data Selection in the Wason Selection Task. Thinking and Reasoning 7 (3):295 – 311.
Simone Duca (2009). Rationality and the Wason Selection Task: A Logical Account. Psyche 15 (1):109-131.
Mike Oaksford, Nick Chater & Becki Grainger (1999). Probabilistic Effects in Data Selection. Thinking and Reasoning 5 (3):193 – 243.
Erica Carlisle & Eldar Shafir (2005). Questioning the Cheater-Detection Hypothesis: New Studies with the Selection Task. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (2):97 – 122.
Added to index2009-09-16
Total downloads18 ( #74,462 of 722,744 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,744 )
How can I increase my downloads?