The logic of content effects in propositional reasoning: The case of conditional reasoning with a point of view
Thinking and Reasoning 9 (4):335 – 378 (2003)
In order to resolve the controversial discussion regarding content effects in deductive reasoning, we propose distinguishing between two inferential sources—an argument's form , and additional relations people associate with the argument's content —and analysing their interplay. Both sources are equally necessary in order to understand the role content plays in deductive reasoning. People make valid deductions from the content relations ( content competence ), but in thematic reasoning tasks, these deductions lead to the intriguing phenomenon known as content effects . Focusing on the interplay of both sources of inferences, the dual source distinction enables a novel class of predictions to be made, namely the correct mastery of the logical connectors ( form competence ) in tasks that require the individual to think about an argument's form in relation to its content. To illustrate the dual source approach and its implications, the selection task paradigm of conditional reasoning with a point of view is used in combination with two content domains: conditional promises with cheating and non-cheating perspectives and technical systems with causal perspectives. Experimental findings corroborate all three phenomena: content competence, content effects, and form competence. The dual source distinction is discussed with regard to current theories of reasoning.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
To Naturalize or Not to Naturalize? An Issue for Cognitive Science as Well as Anthropology.Keith Stenning - 2012 - Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (3):413-419.
Distinguishing Between Causes and Enabling Conditions—Through Mental Models or Linguistic Cues?Gregory Kuhnmünch & Sieghard Beller - 2005 - Cognitive Science 29 (6):1077-1090.
Similar books and articles
Contrast Classes and Matching Bias as Explanations of the Effects of Negation on Conditional Reasoning.Mike Oaksford - 2002 - Thinking and Reasoning 8 (2):135 – 151.
Deductive and Inductive Conditional Inferences: Two Modes of Reasoning.Henrik Singmann & Karl Christoph Klauer - 2011 - Thinking and Reasoning 17 (3):247 - 281.
Conditional Reasoning with a Spatial Content Requires Visuo-Spatial Working Memory.Wouter Duyck & Andr - 2003 - Thinking and Reasoning 9 (3):267 – 287.
Matching Bias in Conditional Reasoning: Do We Understand It After 25 Years?Jonathan St B. T. Evans - 1998 - Thinking and Reasoning 4 (1):45 – 110.
Conditional Reasoning with Realistic Material.Stephen E. Newstead - 1997 - Thinking and Reasoning 3 (1):49 – 76.
Pronounced Inferences: A Study on Inferential Conditionals.Sara Verbrugge, Kristien Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken, Hans Smessaert & William Van Belle - 2007 - Thinking and Reasoning 13 (2):105 – 133.
What Causal Conditional Reasoning Tells Us About People's Understanding of Causality.Sieghard Beller & Gregory Kuhnm - 2007 - Thinking and Reasoning 13 (4):426 – 460.
Deontic Norms, Deontic Reasoning, and Deontic Conditionals.Sieghard Beller - 2008 - Thinking and Reasoning 14 (4):305 – 341.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #206,463 of 2,153,589 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #76,596 of 2,153,589 )
How can I increase my downloads?