Psychological Review (5):611-633 (2019)
AbstractSuppose that two competing norms, N1 and N2, can be identified such that a given person’s response can be interpreted as correct according to N1 but incorrect according to N2. Which of these two norms, if any, should one use to interpret such a response? In this paper we seek to address this fundamental problem by studying individual variation in the interpretation of conditionals by establishing individual profiles of the participants based on their case judgments and reflective attitudes. To investigate the participants’ reflective attitudes we introduce a new experimental paradigm called the Scorekeeping Task. As a case study, we identify the participants who follow the Suppositional Theory of conditionals (N1) versus Inferentialism (N2) and investigate to what extent internally consistent competence models can be reconstructed for the participants on this basis. After extensive empirical investigations, an apparent reasoning error with and-to-if inferences was found in one of these two groups. The implications of this case study for debates on the proper role of normative considerations in psychology are discussed.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Similar books and articles
Conditionals, Individual Variation, and the Scorekeeping Task.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen, David Kellen, Ulrike Hahn & Karl Christoph Klauer - 2017 - Proceedings of Cognitive Science 39:xxx.
Pronounced Inferences: A Study on Inferential Conditionals.Sara9 Verbrugge, Kristien3 Dieussaert, Walter Schaeken, Hans5 Smessaert & William Van Belle - 2007 - Thinking and Reasoning 13 (2):105 – 133.
Cancellation, Negation, and Rejection.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen, Peter Collins, Karolina Krzyżanowska, Ulrike Hahn & Karl Christoph Klauer - 2019 - Cognitive Psychology 108:42-71.
A Priori True and False Conditionals.Ana Cristina Quelhas, Célia Rasga & Philip N. Johnson-Laird - 2017 - Cognitive Science 41 (S5):1003-1030.
Relevance Differently Affects the Truth, Acceptability, and Probability Evaluations of “and”, “but”, “Therefore”, and “If–Then”.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen, David Kellen, Hannes Krahl & Karl Christoph Klauer - 2017 - Thinking and Reasoning 23 (4):449-482.
Ranking Theory and Conditional Reasoning.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen - 2016 - Cognitive Science 40 (4):848-880.
Putting Inferentialism and the Suppositional Theory of Conditionals to the Test.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen - 2017 - Dissertation, University of Freiburg
Making Ranking Theory Useful for Psychology of Reasoning.Niels Skovgaard Olsen - 2014 - Dissertation, University of Konstanz
Conditionals, Counterfactuals, and Rational Reasoning: An Experimental Study on Basic Principles.Leena Tulkki & Niki Pfeifer - 2017 - Minds and Machines 27 (1):119-165.
The Relevance Effect and Conditionals.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen, Henrik Singmann & Karl Christoph Klauer - 2016 - Cognition 150:26-36.
Abstract Reasoning and the Interpretation of Basic Conditionals.Henry Markovits, Pier-Luc de Chantal & Janie Brisson - 2018 - Thinking and Reasoning 25 (1):1-13.
Probabilistic Theories of Reasoning Need Pragmatics Too: Modulating Relevance in Uncertain Conditionals.A. J. B. Fugard, Niki Pfeifer & B. Mayerhofer - 2011 - Journal of Pragmatics 43:2034–2042.
How People Interpret Conditionals: Shifts Towards the Conditional Event.A. J. B. Fugard, Niki Pfeifer, B. Mayerhofer & Gernot D. Kleiter - 2011 - Journal of Experimental Psychology 37 (3):635-648.
References found in this work
Citations of this work
Conditionals and the Hierarchy of Causal Queries.Niels Skovgaard-Olsen, Simon Stephan & Michael R. Waldmann - 2021 - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1 (12):2472-2505.
Ranking Theory.Gabriele Kern-Isberner, Niels Skovgaard-Olsen & Wolfgang Spohn - forthcoming - Knauff, M. & Spohn, W. (Eds). The Handbook of Rationality. MIT Press.
Abductive Conditionals as a Test Case for Inferentialism.Patricia Mirabile & Igor Douven - 2020 - Cognition 200:104232.