Thinking and Reasoning 15 (3):250 – 267 (2009)
Research across a variety of domains has found that people fail to evaluate statistical information in an atheoretical manner. Rather, people tend to evaluate statistical information in light of their pre-existing beliefs and experiences. The locus of these biases continues to be hotly debated. In two experiments we evaluate the degree to which reasoning when relevant beliefs are readily accessible (i.e., when reasoning with Belief-Laden content) versus when relevant beliefs are not available (i.e., when reasoning with Non-Belief-Laden content) differentially demands attentional resources. In Experiment 1 we found that reasoning with scenarios that contained Belief-Laden content required fewer attentional resources than reasoning with scenarios that contained Non-Belief-Laden content, as evidenced by smaller costs on a secondary memory load task for the former than the latter. This trend was reversed in Experiment 2 when participants were instructed to ignore their beliefs when reasoning with Belief-Laden and Non-Belief-Laden scenarios. These findings provide evidence that beliefs automatically influence reasoning, and attempting to ignore them comes with an attentional cost
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
The Influence of Activation Level on Belief Bias in Relational Reasoning.Adrian P. Banks - 2013 - Cognitive Science 37 (3):544-577.
Similar books and articles
Working Memory, Inhibitory Control and the Development of Children's Reasoning.Dr Simon J. Handley, A. Capon, M. Beveridge, I. Dennis & J. St BT Evans - 2004 - Thinking and Reasoning 10 (2):175 – 195.
Examining the Representation of Causal Knowledge.Jonathan A. Fugelsang, Valerie A. Thompson & Kevin N. Dunbar - 2006 - Thinking and Reasoning 12 (1):1 – 30.
The Content and Epistemology of Phenomenal Belief.David J. Chalmers - 2003 - In Quentin Smith & Aleksandar Jokic (eds.), Consciousness: New Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford University Press. pp. 220--72.
Belief Ascription Under Bounded Resources.Natasha Alechina & Brian Logan - 2010 - Synthese 173 (2):179 - 197.
Belief Revision and Uncertain Reasoning.Guy Politzer & Laure Carles - 2001 - Thinking and Reasoning 7 (3):217 – 234.
For the Sake of the Argument: Ramsey Test Conditionals, Inductive Inference, and Nonmonotonic Reasoning.Isaac Levi - 1996 - Cambridge University Press.
Why Not LF for False Belief Reasoning?Jill G. de Villiers & Peter A. de Villiers - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):682-683.
Added to index2010-05-07
Total downloads38 ( #128,509 of 2,019,589 )
Recent downloads (6 months)21 ( #21,199 of 2,019,589 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.