Conditional reasoning and the Wason selection task: Biconditional interpretation instead of reasoning bias
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Thinking and Reasoning 13 (4):484 – 505 (2007)
Two experiments were conducted to show that the IF … THEN … rules used in the different versions of Wason 's selection task are not psychologically—though they are logically—equivalent. Some of these rules are considered by the participants as strict logical conditionals, whereas others are interpreted as expressing a biconditional relationship. A deductive task was used jointly with the selection task to show that the original abstract rule is quite ambiguous in this respect, contrary to deontic rules: the typical “error” made by most people may indeed be explained by the fact that they consider the abstract rule as a biconditional. Thus, there is no proper error or bias in the selection task as it is still argued, but a differential interpretation of the rule. The need for taking into account a pragmatic component in the process of reasoning is illustrated by the experiments
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
David K. Hardman (1998). Discussion de-Focusing on the Wason Selection Task: Mental Models or Mental Inference Rules? A Commentary on Green and Larking (1995). Thinking and Reasoning 4 (1):83 – 94.
David Hardman (1998). Does Reasoning Occur on the Selection Task? A Comparison of Relevance-Based Theories. Thinking and Reasoning 4 (4):353 – 376.
George L. Dunbar (2000). Traces of Reasoning with Pragmatic Schemas. Thinking and Reasoning 6 (2):173 – 181.
Mike Oaksford (2002). Contrast Classes and Matching Bias as Explanations of the Effects of Negation on Conditional Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 8 (2):135 – 151.
Mike Oaksford, Nick Chater & Becki Grainger (1999). Probabilistic Effects in Data Selection. Thinking and Reasoning 5 (3):193 – 243.
Simone Duca (2009). Rationality and the Wason Selection Task: A Logical Account. Psyche 15 (1):109-131.
Dan Sperber (2002). Use or Misuse of the Selection Task? Rejoinder to Fiddick, Cosmides, and Tooby. Cognition 85 (3):277-290.
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads50 ( #89,166 of 1,934,835 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #146,322 of 1,934,835 )
How can I increase my downloads?