Skip to main content
Log in

Symposium on “Cognition and Rationality: Part I” Relevance effects in reasoning

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mind & Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reasoning research has focussed mainly on the type of cognitive processes involved when representing premises and when producing conclusions. But less is known about the factors that guide these representational and inferential processes. What premises are actually taken as input in reasoning? And what conclusions are intended? In this paper it is argued that considerations of relevance (Sperber and Wilson, Relevance: communication and cognition. Blackwell, Oxford, 1995) are helpful for addressing these issues as a pragmatic analysis of two sorts of tasks is carried out, Wason’s 2-4-6 problem (Study 1) and a conditional reasoning problem (Study 2). Study 1 indicates that the way this task is communicated may encourage participants to consider misleading information as highly relevant for solving it. Two experiments go on to show that when the relevance of misleading information is contextually diminished, participants are more efficient at providing the correct solution. Study 2 compares the production rate of two sorts of conclusions: logically valid but weakly relevant conclusions and invalid but relevant and pragmatically justified conclusions. This study shows that the relevance of conclusions determines to a large extent whether or not they will be produced.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Wason (1968) ends his chapter with the following remark: “In the real world, as opposed to the psychological laboratory, the fixated, obsessional behaviour of some the subjects would be analogous to that of a person who is thinking within a closed system—a system which defies refutation, e.g., existentialism and the majority of religions. These experiments demonstrate, on a miniature scale, how dogmatic thinking and the refusal to entertain the possibility of alternatives can easily result in error” (see p. 174 in Wason 1968).

References

  • Braine MDS, O’Brien DP (1998) Mental logic. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark HH (1969) Linguistic processes in deductive reasoning. Psychol Rev 76:387–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dulany DE, Hilton DJ (1991) Conversational implicature, conscious representation, and the conjunction fallacy. Soc Cogn 9:85–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans JStBT (1989) Bias in human reasoning: causes and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans JStBT (1995) Relevance and reasoning. In: Newstead SE, Evans JStBT (eds) Perspectives on thinking and reasoning. Essays in honour of PeterWason. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorman ME (1995) Hypothesis testing. In: Newstead SE, Evans JStBT (eds) Perspectives on thinking and reasoning. Essays in honour of Peter Wason. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice HP (1975) Logic and conversation. In: Cole P, Morgan JL (eds) Studies in syntax, vol 3: Speech acts. Academic, New York

  • Hardman D (1998) Does reasoning occur on the selection task? A comparison of relevance-based theories. Think Reasoning 4(4):353–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman G (1995) Rationality. In: Smith EE, Osherson DN (eds) Thinking: an invitation to cognitive science, vol 3, 2nd edn

  • Henle M (1962) The relation between logic and thinking. Psychol Rev 69:366–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilton DJ (1995) The social context of reasoning: conversational inference and rational judgment. Psychol Bull 118:248–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huttenlocher J (1968) Constructing spatial images: a strategy in reasoning. Psychol Rev 75:550–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird PN (1983) Mental models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird PN, Byrne RMJ (1991) Deduction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird PN, Byrne RMJ (2002) Conditionals: a theory of meaning, pragmatics, and inference. Psychol Rev 109:646–678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird PN, Savary F (1999) Illusory inferences: a novel class of erroneous deductions. Cognition 71:191–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klayman J, Ha YW (1987) Confirmation, disconfirmation and information in hypothesis testing. Psychol Rev 94:211–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macchi L (1995) Pragmatic aspects of the base-rate fallacy. Q J Exp Psychol 48:188–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Poletiek F (2001) Hypothesis-testing behavior. Psychology Press—Taylor and Francis, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Politzer G (1986) Laws of language use and formal logic. J Psycholinguist Res 15:47–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politzer G (2004) Reasoning, judgment, and pragmatics. In: Noveck I, Sperber D (eds) Experimental pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Politzer G, Macchi L (2000) Reasoning and pragmatics. Mind Soc 1:73–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politzer G, Noveck IA (1991) Are conjunction rule violations the result of conversational rule violations. J Psycholinguist Res 20:83–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rips LJ (1994) The psychology of proof. The MIT, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossi S, Caverni JP, Girotto V (2001) Hypothesis testing in a rule discovery problem: when a focused procedure is effective. Q J Exp Psychol A 54:263–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz N, Strack F, Hilton D, Naderer G (1991) Base rates, representativeness, and the logic of conversation: the contextual relevance of “irrelevant” information. Soc Cogn 9:67–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperber D, Wilson D (1995) Relevance: communication and cognition. Blackwell, Oxford

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1983) Extensional vs. intuitive reasoning the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychol Rev 91:293–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Henst JB, Sperber D. (2004) Testing the cognitive and communicative principles of relevance. In: Noveck I, Sperber D (eds) Experimental pragmatics. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Henst JB, Rossi S, Schroyens W (2002a) When participants are not misled they are not so bad after all: a pragmatic analysis of a rule discovery task. Proceedings of the 24th annual conference of the cognitive science society

  • Van der Henst JB, Sperber D, Politzer G (2002b) When is a conclusion worth deriving? A relevance-based analysis of indeterminate relational problems. Think Reasoning 8:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wason PC (1960) On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Q J Exp Psychol 12:129–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wason PC (1968) On the failure to eliminate hypotheses. A second look. In: Wason PC, Johnson-Laird PN (eds) Thinking and reasoning. Penguin, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson D, Sperber D (2004) Relevance theory. In: Horn LR, Ward G (eds) The handbook of pragmatics. Blackwell, Oxford. pp 607–632

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Ira Noveck and an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on a previous version of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Baptiste Van der Henst.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Van der Henst, JB. Symposium on “Cognition and Rationality: Part I” Relevance effects in reasoning. Mind & Society 5, 229–245 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-006-0019-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-006-0019-x

Keywords

Navigation