Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Mental models and tableau logic.Avery D. Andrews - 1993 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (2):334-334.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Interpretation of Classically Quantified Sentences: A Set‐Theoretic Approach.Guy Politzer, Jean‐Baptiste Henst, Claire Delle Luche & Ira A. Noveck - 2006 - Cognitive Science 30 (4):691-723.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Mental Models in Cognitive Science.P. N. Johnson-Laird - 1980 - Cognitive Science 4 (1):71-115.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   84 citations  
  • Visualizing the possibilities.Bruce J. MacLennan - 1993 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (2):356-357.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Quantifier interpretation and syllogistic reasoning.Maxwell J. Roberts, Stephen E. Newstead & Richard A. Griggs - 2001 - Thinking and Reasoning 7 (2):173 – 204.
    Many researchers have suggested that premise interpretation errors can account, at least in part, for errors on categorical syllogisms. However, although it is possible to show that people make such errors in simple inference tasks, the evidence for them is far less clear when actual syllogisms are administered. Part of the problem is due to the lack of clear predictions for the solutions that would be expected when using modified quantifiers, assuming that correct inferences are made from them. This paper (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Activation of end-terms in syllogistic reasoning.Orlando Espino, Carlos Santamaria & Juan A. Garcia-Madruga - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (1):67 – 89.
    We report five experiments showing that the activation of the end-terms of a syllogism is determined by their position in the composite model of the premises. We show that it is not determined by the position of the terms in the rule being applied (Ford, 1994), by the syntactic role of the terms in the premises (Polk & Newell, 1995; Wetherick & Gilhooly, 1990), by the type of conclusion (Chater & Oaksford, 1999), or by the terms from the source premise (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations