Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Confidence and accuracy in deductive reasoning.Jody M. Shynkaruk & Valerie A. Thompson - 2006 - Memory and Cognition 34 (3):619-632.
    In two experiments, we investigated the relationship between confidence and accuracy in syllogistic reasoning. Participants judged the validity of conclusions and provided confidence ratings twice for each problem: once quickly and again after further deliberation. Correlations between confidence and accuracy were small or nonexistent. In addition, confidence and accuracy were mediated by different variables. Confidence judgments appeared to reflect external cues, so that confidence was greater when the participants were allowed additional time to think about the problem, as well as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • Working memory and everyday conditional reasoning: Retrieval and inhibition of stored counterexamples.Wim De Neys, Walter Schaeken & Géry D'Ydewalle - 1995 - Thinking and Reasoning 11 (4):349-381.
    Two experiments examined the contribution of working memory (WM) to the retrieval and inhibition of background knowledge about counterexamples (alternatives and disablers, Cummins, ) during conditional reasoning. Experiment 1 presented a conditional reasoning task with everyday, causal conditionals to a group of people with high and low WM spans. High spans rejected the logically invalid AC and DA inferences to a greater extent than low spans, whereas low spans accepted the logically valid MP and MT inferences less frequently than high (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • The influence of affect on higher level cognition: A review of research on interpretation, judgement, decision making and reasoning. [REVIEW]Isabelle Blanchette & Anne Richards - 2010 - Cognition and Emotion 24 (4):561-595.
    In this paper, we examine whether affect influences higher level cognitive processes. We review research on the effect of emotion on interpretation, judgement, decision making, and reasoning. In all cases, we ask first whether there is evidence that emotion affects each of these processes, and second what mechanisms might underlie these effects. Our review highlights the fact that interpretive biases are primarily linked with anxiety, while more general mood-congruent effects may be seen in judgement. Risk perception is also affected by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   55 citations  
  • Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?Keith E. Stanovich & Richard F. West - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):645-665.
    Much research in the last two decades has demonstrated that human responses deviate from the performance deemed normative according to various models of decision making and rational judgment (e.g., the basic axioms of utility theory). This gap between the normative and the descriptive can be interpreted as indicating systematic irrationalities in human cognition. However, four alternative interpretations preserve the assumption that human behavior and cognition is largely rational. These posit that the gap is due to (1) performance errors, (2) computational (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   375 citations  
  • Reasoning in depression: Impairment on a concept discrimination learning task.Jane E. Baker & Shelley Channon - 1995 - Cognition and Emotion 9 (6):579-597.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • How do emotion and motivation direct executive control?Luiz Pessoa - 2009 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13 (4):160-166.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   103 citations  
  • The effortless nature of conflict detection during thinking.Wim de Neys & Samuel Franssens - 2009 - Thinking and Reasoning 15 (2):105-128.
    Dual process theories conceive human thinking as an interplay between heuristic processes that operate automatically and analytic processes that demand cognitive effort. The interaction between these two types of processes is poorly understood. De Neys and Glumicic (2008) recently found that most of the time heuristic processes are successfully monitored. This monitoring, however, would not demand as many cognitive resources as the analytic thinking that is needed to solve reasoning problems. In the present study we tested the crucial assumption about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations