Peter Wason provided his four-card selection task over five decades ago. It keeps causing difficulties from both the linguistic, the psychological, and the cognitive point of view. Many psychology theories have been proposed in order to remove its problems. This paper tries to offer one more possible account. That account is based on the method of extension and intension presented by Rudolf Carnap. Hence, it resorts to the concept of state-description. The basic ideas of the argumentation are two: 1) people (...) might tend to consider state-descriptions when processing information, and 2) if conditionals are not expressed with a clear contextual framework, they might be interpreted as biconditionals. (shrink)

DePrince relates problems such as dissociation, revictimization and difficulties in social cognition. In particular, she states that individuals with dissociation or have been, by their own testimony, revictimized show obvious difficulties to solve selection tasks designed as social contracts or precautory problems. In my view, these facts mean that, if we accept the theories that there are mechanisms in human mind to regulate social exchanges and situations of risk, individuals with dissociation or revitimized may have altered such mechanisms. However, these (...) theories have been critized and we have no evidence that they are valid. Therefore, in this paper, not admitting the existence of these mechanisms, I try to show that DePrince’s outcomes can be interpreted from other perspectives. DePrince establece relaciones entre problemas como la disociación, la revictimización y ciertas dificultades en la cognición social. En concreto, afirma que las personas que padecen de disociación o que han sufrido, según su propio testimonio, episodios de revictimización manifiestan evidentes dificultades para resolver tareas de selección planteadas como contratos sociales o como problemas de precaución. En nuestra opinión, esto significa que, si aceptamos las teorías que defienden que existen mecanismos en la mente humana que regulan los intercambios sociales y las situaciones de riesgo, las personas que han sido diagnosticadas con disociación o que han sido revictimizadas pueden presentar alteraciones de tales mecanismos. No obstante, esas teorías han sido cuestionadas y no contamos con pruebas concluyentes de que sean válidas. Por ello, en este trabajo, no admitiendo la existencia de los mencionados mecanismos, intentamos mostrar que los resultados de DePrince pueden ser interpretados desde otras perspectivas. (shrink)