107 found
Order:
  1.  8
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2007). Bayesian Rationality: The Probabilistic Approach to Human Reasoning. OUP Oxford.
    Are people rational? This question was central to Greek thought and has been at the heart of psychology and philosophy for millennia. This book provides a radical and controversial reappraisal of conventional wisdom in the psychology of reasoning, proposing that the Western conception of the mind as a logical system is flawed at the very outset. It argues that cognition should be understood in terms of probability theory, the calculus of uncertain reasoning, rather than in terms of logic, the calculus (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   68 citations  
  2.  6
    Thomas L. Griffiths, Nick Chater, Charles Kemp, Amy Perfors & Joshua B. Tenenbaum (2010). Probabilistic Models of Cognition: Exploring Representations and Inductive Biases. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 14 (8):357-364.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   35 citations  
  3.  17
    Morten H. Christiansen & Nick Chater (2008). Language as Shaped by the Brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (5):489-509.
    It is widely assumed that human learning and the structure of human languages are intimately related. This relationship is frequently suggested to derive from a language-specific biological endowment, which encodes universal, but communicatively arbitrary, principles of language structure (a Universal Grammar or UG). How might such a UG have evolved? We argue that UG could not have arisen either by biological adaptation or non-adaptationist genetic processes, resulting in a logical problem of language evolution. Specifically, as the processes of language change (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   28 citations  
  4.  11
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (1991). Against Logicist Cognitive Science. Mind and Language 6 (1):1-38.
  5.  33
    Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (eds.) (2008). The Probabilistic Mind: Prospects for Bayesian Cognitive Science. OUP Oxford.
    'The Probabilistic Mind' is a follow-up to the influential and highly cited 'Rational Models of Cognition' . It brings together developments in understanding how, and how far, high-level cognitive processes can be understood in rational terms, and particularly using probabilistic Bayesian methods.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  6.  55
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2009). Précis of Bayesian Rationality: The Probabilistic Approach to Human Reasoning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (1):69-84.
    According to Aristotle, humans are the rational animal. The borderline between rationality and irrationality is fundamental to many aspects of human life including the law, mental health, and language interpretation. But what is it to be rational? One answer, deeply embedded in the Western intellectual tradition since ancient Greece, is that rationality concerns reasoning according to the rules of logic – the formal theory that specifies the inferential connections that hold with certainty between propositions. Piaget viewed logical reasoning as defining (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  7.  19
    Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (1990). Autonomy, Implementation and Cognitive Architecture: A Reply to Fodor and Pylyshyn. Cognition 34 (1):93-107.
  8.  13
    Nick Chater & Christopher D. Manning (2006). Probabilistic Models of Language Processing and Acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (7):335-344.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  9.  16
    Nick Chater & Alan Yuille (2006). Probabilistic Models of Cognition: Conceptual Foundations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (7):287-291.
    Remarkable progress in the mathematics and computer science of probability has led to a revolution in the scope of probabilistic models. In particular, ‘sophisticated’ probabilistic methods apply to structured relational systems such as graphs and grammars, of immediate relevance to the cognitive sciences. This Special Issue outlines progress in this rapidly developing field, which provides a potentially unifying perspective across a wide range of domains and levels of explanation. Here, we introduce the historical and conceptual foundations of the approach, explore (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  10.  1
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2013). Dynamic Inference and Everyday Conditional Reasoning in the New Paradigm. Thinking and Reasoning 19 (3-4):346-379.
  11. Nick Chater & P. Vitanyi (2003). Simplicity: A Unifying Principle in Cognitive Science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7 (1):19-22.
  12.  12
    Padraic Monaghan, Nick Chater & Morten H. Christiansen (2005). The Differential Role of Phonological and Distributional Cues in Grammatical Categorisation. Cognition 96 (2):143-182.
  13.  4
    Nilufa Ali, Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (2011). The Mental Representation of Causal Conditional Reasoning: Mental Models or Causal Models. Cognition 119 (3):403-418.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  14.  20
    Nick Chater & Morten H. Christiansen (2010). Language Acquisition Meets Language Evolution. Cognitive Science 34 (7):1131-1157.
    Recent research suggests that language evolution is a process of cultural change, in which linguistic structures are shaped through repeated cycles of learning and use by domain-general mechanisms. This paper draws out the implications of this viewpoint for understanding the problem of language acquisition, which is cast in a new, and much more tractable, form. In essence, the child faces a problem of induction, where the objective is to coordinate with others (C-induction), rather than to model the structure of the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  15.  19
    Anne S. Hsu & Nick Chater (2010). The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition: A Probabilistic Perspective. Cognitive Science 34 (6):972-1016.
    Natural language is full of patterns that appear to fit with general linguistic rules but are ungrammatical. There has been much debate over how children acquire these “linguistic restrictions,” and whether innate language knowledge is needed. Recently, it has been shown that restrictions in language can be learned asymptotically via probabilistic inference using the minimum description length (MDL) principle. Here, we extend the MDL approach to give a simple and practical methodology for estimating how much linguistic data are required to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  16.  4
    Morten H. Christiansen & Nick Chater (1999). Toward a Connectionist Model of Recursion in Human Linguistic Performance. Cognitive Science 23 (2):157-205.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  17.  4
    Ulrike Hahn, Nick Chater & Lucy B. Richardson (2003). Similarity as Transformation. Cognition 87 (1):1-32.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  18.  3
    Martin Redington, Nick Chater & Steven Finch (1998). Distributional Information: A Powerful Cue for Acquiring Syntactic Categories. Cognitive Science 22 (4):425-469.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  19.  1
    Anne S. Hsu, Nick Chater & Paul M. B. Vitányi (2011). The Probabilistic Analysis of Language Acquisition: Theoretical, Computational, and Experimental Analysis. Cognition 120 (3):380-390.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  20.  1
    Ivo Vlaev, Nick Chater, Neil Stewart & Gordon D. A. Brown (2011). Does the Brain Calculate Value? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15 (11):546-554.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  21.  3
    Emmanuel M. Pothos & Nick Chater (2002). A Simplicity Principle in Unsupervised Human Categorization. Cognitive Science 26 (3):303-343.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  22.  3
    Nick Chater & Gordon D. A. Brown (2008). From Universal Laws of Cognition to Specific Cognitive Models. Cognitive Science 32 (1):36-67.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  23.  3
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2014). Probabilistic Single Function Dual Process Theory and Logic Programming as Approaches to Non-Monotonicity in Human Vs. Artificial Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 20 (2):269-295.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  4
    Andrea Baronchelli, Ramon Ferrer-I.-Cancho, Romualdo Pastor-Satorras, Nick Chater & Morten H. Christiansen (2013). Networks in Cognitive Science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 17 (7):348-360.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  19
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2003). Conditional Probability and the Cognitive Science of Conditional Reasoning. Mind and Language 18 (4):359–379.
  26.  2
    Nick Chater, Noah Goodman, Thomas L. Griffiths, Charles Kemp, Mike Oaksford & Joshua B. Tenenbaum (2011). The Imaginary Fundamentalists: The Unshocking Truth About Bayesian Cognitive Science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (4):194-196.
    If Bayesian Fundamentalism existed, Jones & Love's (J&L's) arguments would provide a necessary corrective. But it does not. Bayesian cognitive science is deeply concerned with characterizing algorithms and representations, and, ultimately, implementations in neural circuits; it pays close attention to environmental structure and the constraints of behavioral data, when available; and it rigorously compares multiple models, both within and across papers. J&L's recommendation of Bayesian Enlightenment corresponds to past, present, and, we hope, future practice in Bayesian cognitive science.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  27.  0
    Ramsey M. Raafat, Nick Chater & Chris Frith (2009). Herding in Humans. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13 (10):420-428.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  28.  4
    Katya Tentori, Nick Chater & Vincenzo Crupi (2015). Judging the Probability of Hypotheses Versus the Impact of Evidence: Which Form of Inductive Inference Is More Accurate and Time‐Consistent? Cognitive Science 39 (6).
    Inductive reasoning requires exploiting links between evidence and hypotheses. This can be done focusing either on the posterior probability of the hypothesis when updated on the new evidence or on the impact of the new evidence on the credibility of the hypothesis. But are these two cognitive representations equally reliable? This study investigates this question by comparing probability and impact judgments on the same experimental materials. The results indicate that impact judgments are more consistent in time and more accurate than (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  31
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2009). The Uncertain Reasoner: Bayes, Logic, and Rationality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (1):105-120.
    Human cognition requires coping with a complex and uncertain world. This suggests that dealing with uncertainty may be the central challenge for human reasoning. In Bayesian Rationality we argue that probability theory, the calculus of uncertainty, is the right framework in which to understand everyday reasoning. We also argue that probability theory explains behavior, even on experimental tasks that have been designed to probe people's logical reasoning abilities. Most commentators agree on the centrality of uncertainty; some suggest that there is (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  30.  2
    Nick Chater, Joshua B. Tenenbaum & Alan Yuille (2006). Probabilistic Models of Cognition: Where Next? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (7):292-293.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  31.  9
    Morten H. Christiansen & Nick Chater (2001). Connectionist Psycholinguistics: Capturing the Empirical Data. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (2):82-88.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  32.  4
    Martin Redington & Nick Chater (1996). Transfer in Artificial Grammar Learning: A Reevaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 125 (2):123.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  33. Susan Hurley & Nick Chater (eds.) (2005). Perspectives on Imitation: From Mirror Neurons to Memes, Vol II. MIT Press.
  34.  75
    Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (2000). The Rational Analysis of Mind and Behavior. Synthese 122 (1-2):93-131.
    Rational analysis (Anderson 1990, 1991a) is an empiricalprogram of attempting to explain why the cognitive system isadaptive, with respect to its goals and the structure of itsenvironment. We argue that rational analysis has two importantimplications for philosophical debate concerning rationality. First,rational analysis provides a model for the relationship betweenformal principles of rationality (such as probability or decisiontheory) and everyday rationality, in the sense of successfulthought and action in daily life. Second, applying the program ofrational analysis to research on human reasoning (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  35.  1
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2008). Probability Logic and the Modus Ponens-Modus Tollens Asymmetry in Conditional Inference. In Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (eds.), The Probabilistic Mind: Prospects for Bayesian Cognitive Science. OUP Oxford 97--120.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  36.  0
    Ulrike Hahn & Nick Chater (1998). Similarity and Rules: Distinct? Exhaustive? Empirically Distinguishable? Cognition 65 (2-3):197-230.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  37.  4
    Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (1999). Ten Years of the Rational Analysis of Cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3 (2):57-65.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  38.  1
    Nick Chater (1993). Categorization, Theories and Folk Psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (1):37.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  39.  13
    Christian P. Janssen, Duncan P. Brumby, John Dowell, Nick Chater & Andrew Howes (2011). Identifying Optimum Performance Trade-Offs Using a Cognitively Bounded Rational Analysis Model of Discretionary Task Interleaving. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (1):123-139.
    We report the results of a dual-task study in which participants performed a tracking and typing task under various experimental conditions. An objective payoff function was used to provide explicit feedback on how participants should trade off performance between the tasks. Results show that participants’ dual-task interleaving strategy was sensitive to changes in the difficulty of the tracking task and resulted in differences in overall task performance. To test the hypothesis that people select strategies that maximize payoff, a Cognitively Bounded (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40.  12
    Janet I. Vousden, Michelle R. Ellefson, Jonathan Solity & Nick Chater (2011). Simplifying Reading: Applying the Simplicity Principle to Reading. Cognitive Science 35 (1):34-78.
    Debates concerning the types of representations that aid reading acquisition have often been influenced by the relationship between measures of early phonological awareness (the ability to process speech sounds) and later reading ability. Here, a complementary approach is explored, analyzing how the functional utility of different representational units, such as whole words, bodies (letters representing the vowel and final consonants of a syllable), and graphemes (letters representing a phoneme) may change as the number of words that can be read gradually (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41.  2
    Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2011). The “is-Ought Fallacy” Fallacy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (5):262-263.
    Mere facts about how the world is cannot determine how we ought to think or behave. Elqayam & Evans (E&E) argue that this undercuts the use of rational analysis in explaining how people reason, by ourselves and with others. But this presumed application of the fallacy is itself fallacious. Rational analysis seeks to explain how people do reason, for example in laboratory experiments, not how they ought to reason. Thus, no ought is derived from an is; and rational analysis is (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42.  8
    Mike Oaksford, Nick Chater & Becki Grainger (1999). Probabilistic Effects in Data Selection. Thinking and Reasoning 5 (3):193 – 243.
    Four experiments investigated the effects of probability manipulations on the indicative four card selection task (Wason, 1966, 1968). All looked at the effects of high and low probability antecedents (p) and consequents (q) on participants' data selections when determining the truth or falsity of a conditional rule, if p then q . Experiments 1 and 2 also manipulated believability. In Experiment 1, 128 participants performed the task using rules with varied contents pretested for probability of occurrence. Probabilistic effects were observed (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  43.  1
    Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (2011). Local and Global Inferential Relations: Response to Over (2009). Thinking and Reasoning 15 (4):439-446.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  44.  1
    Nilufa Ali, Anne Schlottmann, Abigail Shaw, Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford (2010). Causal Discounting and Conditional Reasoning in Children. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (eds.), Cognition and Conditionals: Probability and Logic in Human Thought. Oxford University Press
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  45.  2
    Martin Redington & Nick Chater (1997). Probabilistic and Distributional Approaches to Language Acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1 (7):273-281.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  46.  3
    Carl J. Hodgetts, Ulrike Hahn & Nick Chater (2009). Transformation and Alignment in Similarity. Cognition 113 (1):62-79.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  36
    Nick Chater & Cecilia M. Heyes (1994). Animal Concepts: Content and Discontent. Mind and Language 9 (3):209-246.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  48.  5
    Nick Chater & Gordon D. A. Brown (1999). Scale-Invariance as a Unifying Psychological Principle. Cognition 69 (3):B17-B24.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  49.  0
    Nick Chater (2009). Rational and Mechanistic Perspectives on Reinforcement Learning. Cognition 113 (3):350-364.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  12
    M. H. Christiansen & Nick Chater (1994). Generalization and Connectionist Language Learning. Mind and Language 9 (3):273-87.
1 — 50 / 107