Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The probabilistic approach to human reasoning.Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater - 2001 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (8):349-357.
    A recent development in the cognitive science of reasoning has been the emergence of a probabilistic approach to the behaviour observed on ostensibly logical tasks. According to this approach the errors and biases documented on these tasks occur because people import their everyday uncertain reasoning strategies into the laboratory. Consequently participants' apparently irrational behaviour is the result of comparing it with an inappropriate logical standard. In this article, we contrast the probabilistic approach with other approaches to explaining rationality, and then (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  • Do We “do‘?Steven A. Sloman & David A. Lagnado - 2005 - Cognitive Science 29 (1):5-39.
    A normative framework for modeling causal and counterfactual reasoning has been proposed by Spirtes, Glymour, and Scheines. The framework takes as fundamental that reasoning from observation and intervention differ. Intervention includes actual manipulation as well as counterfactual manipulation of a model via thought. To represent intervention, Pearl employed the do operator that simplifies the structure of a causal model by disconnecting an intervened-on variable from its normal causes. Construing the do operator as a psychological function affords predictions about how people (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   65 citations  
  • No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task.Laurence Fiddick, Leda Cosmides & John Tooby - 2000 - Cognition 77 (1):1-79.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   63 citations  
  • Finding Useful Questions: On Bayesian Diagnosticity, Probability, Impact, and Information Gain.Jonathan D. Nelson - 2005 - Psychological Review 112 (4):979-999.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  • Probabilistic effects in data selection.Mike Oaksford, Nick Chater & Becki Grainger - 1999 - Thinking and Reasoning 5 (3):193 – 243.
    Four experiments investigated the effects of probability manipulations on the indicative four card selection task (Wason, 1966, 1968). All looked at the effects of high and low probability antecedents (p) and consequents (q) on participants' data selections when determining the truth or falsity of a conditional rule, if p then q . Experiments 1 and 2 also manipulated believability. In Experiment 1, 128 participants performed the task using rules with varied contents pretested for probability of occurrence. Probabilistic effects were observed (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  • Domain-general contributions to social reasoning: theory of mind and deontic reasoning re-explored.Margaret C. McKinnon & Morris Moscovitch - 2007 - Cognition 102 (2):179-218.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • The rational analysis of mind and behavior.Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford - 2000 - Synthese 122 (1-2):93-131.
    Rational analysis (Anderson 1990, 1991a) is an empiricalprogram of attempting to explain why the cognitive system isadaptive, with respect to its goals and the structure of itsenvironment. We argue that rational analysis has two importantimplications for philosophical debate concerning rationality. First,rational analysis provides a model for the relationship betweenformal principles of rationality (such as probability or decisiontheory) and everyday rationality, in the sense of successfulthought and action in daily life. Second, applying the program ofrational analysis to research on human reasoning (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Deontic Reasoning With Emotional Content: Evolutionary Psychology or Decision Theory?Nick Perham & Mike Oaksford - 2005 - Cognitive Science 29 (5):681-718.
    Three experiments investigated the contrasting predictions of the evolutionary and decision-theoretic approaches to deontic reasoning. Two experiments embedded a hazard management (HM) rule in a social contract scenario that should lead to competition between innate modules. A 3rd experiment used a pure HM task. Threatening material was also introduced into the antecedent, p, of a deontic rule, if p then must q. According to the evolutionary approach, more HM responses (Cosmides & Tooby, 2000) are predicted when p is threatening, whereas (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Bayesian rationality for the Wason selection task? A test of optimal data selection theory.Klaus Oberauer, Oliver Wilhelm & Ricardo Rosas Diaz - 1999 - Thinking and Reasoning 5 (2):115 – 144.
    Oaksford and Chater (1994) proposed to analyse the Wason selection task as an inductive instead of a deductive task. Applying Bayesian statistics, they concluded that the cards that participants tend to select are those with the highest expected information gain. Therefore, their choices seem rational from the perspective of optimal data selection. We tested a central prediction from the theory in three experiments: card selection frequencies should be sensitive to the subjective probability of occurrence for individual cards. In Experiment 1, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Deontic Reasoning, Modules and Innateness: A Second Look.Nick Chater & Mike Oaksford - 1996 - Mind and Language 11 (2):191-202.
    Cummins (this issue) puts the case for an innate module for deontic reasoning. We argue that this case is not persuasive. First, we claim that Cummins’evolutionary arguments are neutral regarding whether deontic reasoning is learned or innate. Second, we argue that task differences between deontic and indicative reasoning explain many of the phenomena that Cummins takes as evidence for a deontic module. Third, we argue against the suggestion that deontic reasoning is superior to indicative reasoning, either in adults or children. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Is domain-general thinking a domain-specific adaptation?Vittorio Girotto & Katya Tentori - 2008 - Mind and Society 7 (2):167-175.
    According to Kanazawa (Psychol Rev 111:512–523, 2004), general intelligence, which he considers as a synonym of abstract thinking, evolved specifically to allow our ancestors to deal with evolutionary novel problems while conferring no advantage in solving evolutionary familiar ones. We present a study whereby the results contradict Kanazawa’s hypothesis by demonstrating that performance on an evolutionary novel problem (an abstract reasoning task) predicts performance on an evolutionary familiar problem (a social reasoning task).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Sharing-rule and detection of free-riders in cooperative groups: Evolutionarily important deontic reasoning in the Wason selection task.Kai Hiraishi & Toshikazu Hasegawa - 2001 - Thinking and Reasoning 7 (3):255 – 294.
    Taking a Darwinian approach, we propose that people reason to detect free-riders on the Wason Selection task with the sharing-rule; If one receives the resource, one is an in-group member (standard), or If one is an in-group member, one receives the resource (switched). As predicted, taking the resource-provider's perspective, both undergraduates and children (11 to 12 years old) checked for the existence of out-group members taking undeserved resource. Changing the perspective to that of the resource-recipient did not alter the selection (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Individual differences in conditional reasoning: A dual-process account.Paul A. Klaczynski & David B. Daniel - 2005 - Thinking and Reasoning 11 (4):305 – 325.
    Dual-process theories of conditional reasoning predict that relationships among four basic logical forms, and to intellectual ability and thinking predictions, are most evident when conflict arises between experiential and analytic processing (e.g., Stanovich & West, 2000). To test these predictions, 210 undergraduates were presented with conditionals for which the consequents were either weakly or strongly associated with alternative antecedents (i.e., WA and SA problems, respectively). Consistent with predictions, modus ponens inferences were not related to inferences on the uncertain forms (affirmation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Semantics as a foundation for psychology: A case study of Wason's selection task. [REVIEW]Keith Stenning & Michiel van Lambalgen - 2001 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10 (3):273-317.
    We review the various explanations that have been offered toaccount for subjects'' behaviour in Wason ''s famous selection task. Weargue that one element that is lacking is a good understanding ofsubjects'' semantics for the key expressions involved, and anunderstanding of how this semantics is affected by the demands the taskputs upon the subject''s cognitive system. We make novel proposals inthese terms for explaining the major content effects of deonticmaterials. Throughout we illustrate with excerpts from tutorialdialogues which motivate the kinds of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Two projects for understanding the mind: A response to Morris and Richardson. [REVIEW]Nick Chater & Martin Pickering - 1997 - Minds and Machines 7 (4):553-569.
    We respond to Morris and Richardson 's claim that Pickering and Chater's arguments about the lack of a relation between cognitive science and folk psychology are flawed. We note that possible controversies about the appropriate uses for the two terms do not affect our arguments. We then address their claim that computational explanation of knowledge-rich processes has proved possible in the domains of problem solving, scientific discovery, and reasoning. We argue that, in all cases, computational explanation is only possible for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation