21 found
Sort by:
  1. Aline Sevenants, Kristien Dieussaert & Walter Schaeken (2012). Is the Truth Table Task Mistaken? Thinking and Reasoning 18 (2):119 - 132.
    There is ample evidence that in classical truth table task experiments false antecedents are judged as ?irrelevant?. Instead of interpreting this in support of a suppositional representation of conditionals, Schroyens (2010a, 2010b) attributes it to the induction problem: the impossibility of establishing the truth of a universal claim on the basis of a single case. In the first experiment a truth table task with four options is administered and the correlation with intelligence is inspected. It is observed that ?undetermined? is (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Aline Sevenants, Kristien Dieussaert & Walter Schaeken (2011). Truth Table Tasks: Irrelevance and Cognitive Ability. Thinking and Reasoning 17 (3):213 - 246.
    Two types of truth table task are used to examine people's mental representation of conditionals. In two within-participants experiments, participants either receive the same task-type twice (Experiment 1) or are presented successively with both a possibilities task and a truth task (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 examines how people interpret the three-option possibilities task and whether they have a clear understanding of it. The present study aims to examine, for both task-types, how participants' cognitive ability relates to the classification of the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Ellen Gillard, Wim Van Dooren, Walter Schaeken & Lieven Verschaffel (2009). Processing Time Evidence for a Default-Interventionist Model of Probability Judgments. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Géry D'Ydewalle, Walter Schaeken, Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schroyens & Aline Sevenants (2008). Truth Table Tasks: The Relevance of Irrelevant. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):409-433.
    Two types of truth table tasks are used investigating mental representations of conditionals: a possibilities-based and a truth-based one. In possibilities tasks, participants indicate whether a situation is possible or impossible according to the conditional rule. In truth tasks participants evaluate whether a situation makes the rule true or false, or is irrelevant with respect to the truth of the rule. Comparing the two-option version of the possibilities task with the truth task in Experiment 1, the possibilities task yields logical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Aline Sevenants, Walter Schroyens, Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken & G. (2008). Truth Table Tasks: The Relevance of Irrelevant. Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):409-433.
    Two types of truth table tasks are used investigating mental representations of conditionals: a possibilities-based and a truth-based one. In possibilities tasks, participants indicate whether a situation is possible or impossible according to the conditional rule. In truth tasks participants evaluate whether a situation makes the rule true or false, or is irrelevant with respect to the truth of the rule. Comparing the two-option version of the possibilities task with the truth task in Experiment 1, the possibilities task yields logical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Eef Ameel, Niki Verschueren & Walter Schaeken (2007). The Relevance of Selecting What's Relevant: A Dual Process Approach to Transitive Reasoning with Spatial Relations. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (2):164 – 187.
    The present paper focuses on the heuristic selection process preceding the actual transitive reasoning process. A part of the difficulty of transitive reasoning lies in the selection of the relevant problem aspects. Two experiments are presented using the paradigm introduced by Markovits, Dumas, and Malfait (1995), in which children were asked to make “higher than” inferences about arrays of coloured blocks. In order to discriminate between genuine transitive inference and a simple strategy of relative position, Markovits et al. interspersed white (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Sara Verbrugge, Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken, Hans Smessaert & William Van Belle (2007). Pronounced Inferences: A Study on Inferential Conditionals. Thinking and Reasoning 13 (2):105 – 133.
    An experimental study is reported which investigates the differences in interpretation between content conditionals (of various pragmatic types) and inferential conditionals. In a content conditional, the antecedent represents a requirement for the consequent to become true. In an inferential conditional, the antecedent functions as a premise and the consequent as the inferred conclusion from that premise. The linguistic difference between content and inferential conditionals is often neglected in reasoning experiments. This turns out to be unjustified, since we adduced evidence on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Wim De Neys, Walter Schaeken & Géry D'Ydewalle (2005). Working Memory and Everyday Conditional Reasoning: Retrieval and Inhibition of Stored Counterexamples. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (4):349-381.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Wim De Neys, Walter Schaeken & Géry D'Ydewalle (2005). Working Memory and Counterexample Retrieval for Causal Conditionals. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (2):123-150.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Wim de Neys, Walter Schaeken & G. (2005). Working Memory and Counterexample Retrieval for Causal Conditionals. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (2):123 – 150.
    The present study is part of recent attempts to specify the characteristics of the counterexample retrieval process during causal conditional reasoning. The study tried to pinpoint whether the retrieval of stored counterexamples (alternative causes and disabling conditions) for a causal conditional is completely automatic in nature or whether the search process also demands executive working memory (WM) resources. In Experiment 1, participants were presented with a counterexample generation task and a measure of WM capacity. We found a positive relation between (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Wim de Neys, Walter Schaeken & G. (2005). Working Memory and Everyday Conditional Reasoning: Retrieval and Inhibition of Stored Counterexamples. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (4):349 – 381.
    Two experiments examined the contribution of working memory (WM) to the retrieval and inhibition of background knowledge about counterexamples (alternatives and disablers, Cummins, 1995) during conditional reasoning. Experiment 1 presented a conditional reasoning task with everyday, causal conditionals to a group of people with high and low WM spans. High spans rejected the logically invalid AC and DA inferences to a greater extent than low spans, whereas low spans accepted the logically valid MP and MT inferences less frequently than high (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Jean-Baptiste Van der Henst & Walter Schaeken (2005). The Wording of Conclusions in Relational Reasoning. Cognition 97 (1):1-22.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Niki Verschueren, Walter Schaeken & Géry D'Ydewalle (2005). A Dual-Process Specification of Causal Conditional Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (3):239-278.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Niki Verschueren, Walter Schaeken & G. (2005). A Dual-Process Specification of Causal Conditional Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 11 (3):239 – 278.
    There are two accounts describing causal conditional reasoning: the probabilistic and the mental models account. According to the probabilistic account, the tendency to accept a conclusion is related to the probability by which cause and effect covary. According to the mental models account, the tendency to accept a conclusion relates to the availability of counterexamples. These two accounts are brought together in a dual-process theory: It is argued that the probabilistic reasoning process can be considered as a heuristic process whereas (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Walter J. Schroyens, Walter Schaeken & Géry D'Ydewalle (2001). The Processing of Negations in Conditional Reasoning: A Meta-Analytic Case Study in Mental Model and/or Mental Logic Theory. Thinking and Reasoning 7 (2):121-172.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Walter J. Schroyens, Walter Schaeken & G. (2001). The Processing of Negations in Conditional Reasoning: A Meta-Analytic Case Study in Mental Model and/or Mental Logic Theory. Thinking and Reasoning 7 (2):121 – 172.
    We present a meta-analytic review on the processing of negations in conditional reasoning about affirmation problems (Modus Ponens: "MP", Affirmation of the Consequent "AC") and denial problems (Denial of the Antecedent "DA", and Modus Tollens "MT"). Findings correct previous generalisations about the phenomena. First, the effects of negation in the part of the conditional about which an inference is made, are not constrained to denial problems. These inferential-negation effects are also observed on AC. Second, there generally are reliable effects of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Niki Verschueren, Walter Schroyens, Walter Schaeken & Géry D’Ydewalle (2001). Why Do Participants Draw Non-Valid Inferences in Conditional Reasoning? Cognition 16:238-246.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken, Walter Schroyens & Gery D'Ydewalle (2000). Strategies During Complex Conditional Inferences. Thinking and Reasoning 6 (2):125 – 160.
    In certain contexts reasoners reject instances of the valid Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens inference form in conditional arguments. Byrne (1989) observed this suppression effect when a conditional premise is accompanied by a conditional containing an additional requirement. In an earlier study, Rumain, Connell, and Braine (1983) observed suppression of the invalid inferences "the denial of the antecedent" and "the affirmation of the consequent" when a conditional premise is accompanied by a conditional containing an alternative requirement. Here we present three (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Walter Schaeken & Philip N. Johnson-Laird (2000). Strategies in Temporal Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 6 (3):193 – 219.
    This paper reports three studies of temporal reasoning. A problem of the following sort, where the letters denote common everyday events: A happens before B. C happens before B. D happens while B. E happens while C. What is the relation between D and EEfficacylls for at least two alternative models to be constructed in order to give the right answer for the right reason (D happens after E). However, the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Walter Schroyens, Niki Verschueren, Walter Schaeken & Gery D'Ydewalle (2000). Conditional Reasoning with Negations: Implicit and Explicit Affirmation or Denial and the Role of Contrast Classes. Thinking and Reasoning 6 (3):221 – 251.
    We report two studies on the effect of implicitly versus explicitly conveying affirmation and denial problems about conditionals. Recently Evans and Handley (1999) and Schroyens et al. (1999b, 2000b) showed that implicit referencing elicits matching bias: Fewer determinate inferences are made, when the categorical premise (e.g., B) mismatches the conditional's referred clause (e.g., A). Also, the effect of implicit affirmation (B affirms not-A) is larger than the effect of implicit denial (B denies A). Schroyens et al. hypothesised that this interaction (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Walter Schaeken, P. N. Johnson-Laird & Gery D'Ydewalle (1996). Mental Models and Temporal Reasoning. Cognition 60 (3):205-234.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation