Reasoning Flashcards
What are the two types of reasoning?
Inductive and deductive
What is meant by deductive reasoning?
Idea- observation-theory
Specific conclusions will follow general theory, people will state general ideas and then verify it in order to reach a specific conclusion.
What is meant by inductive reasoning?
Observation - analysis - theory
This is when people use/make specific observations and then infer/make more generalised conclusions.
What is a syllogism?
This is a form of deductive reasoning where you reach a specific conclusion having examined two premises
What determines the validity of a syllogism?
The structure of an argument, the relationship between premises and conclusion.
What quantifiers are involved in a syllogism?
all, no, some, some not
What is a valid argument in a syllogism?
If you accept the truth of the two premises the conclusion is true
What are the four approaches to understanding performance on reasoning tasks?
identifying simplifying strategies
interpretation of terms
process models
effects of framing and experiences
Give an example of a syllogism.
a = b
b = c
therefore we can conclude A =C
What is meant by the atmosphere of a premise shaping the conclusion?
This is how the quality and quantity of of premises will influence the conclusions made.
What is the quality of a premise?
Whether it is affirmative or negative
What is the Quantity of a premise?
Whether it is universal or particular
Atmosphere theory is an example of what?
A simplifying strategy that people use when confronted with syllogistic reasoning problems
Atmosphere theory suggests that the mood of the premise will influence what?
Judgements about what the mood of the conclusion should be
Mood in atmosphere theory refers to whether the statements are what?
affirmative/negative and Universal/Particular
All is an example of what type of premise?
Affirmative and universal
Begg and Denny (1969) investigated how atmosphere theory affected people’s responses to syllogistic reasoning problems. Outline this study
Gave PP’s 64 reasoning problems
- With two premises and four conclusions to choice fro as an a answer
- Only 19 had a valid solution
- Experimenters were focused on the ones that had no solution and how people responded to them
What were the findings of Begg and Denny (1969) study into atmosphere theory?
When both premises were positive, 79% of conclusions endorsed were positive
When at least one premise was negative, 73% of chosen conclusions were negative
When both premises were universal, 77% of chosen conclusions were universal
When at least one premise was particular, 90% of chosen conclusions were particular
What do the fings of Begg and Denny go to suggest?
That atmosphere will influence how a person answers a syllogism, i.e the quality and quantity of the premise will shape beliefs about the validity of the conclusion.
What does atmosphere theory fail to explain?
how people decide whether or not a syllogism has a valid conclusion
People will often make invalid conclusions because they misinterpret the premises in way the experimenter did not intend. What approach is this?
focus on the interpretation of the terms
Ceraso and Provitera (1971) investigated what?
How misinterpretation of premise will cause invalid conclusions
How do people often misinterpret All A are B?
They may assume this applies vice versa and thus all B are A where in actual fact it just means that some but not all
How do people often misinterpret All A are B?
They may assume this applies vice versa and thus all B are A where in actual fact it just means that some but not all
How did Ceraso et al. modify the task?
People were given clearer and more explicit instructions in the premises which then correctly guided their conclusions.
Whenever I have a block with a hole it is red, but not all red blocks have holes
Whenever I have a block with a hole it is triangular, but not all triangular blocks have holes.
What is the correct answer to this ?
Some red blocks are triangular
This is the correct answer given the two premises
Experimenters who focused on the interpretation of terms argued the reason for syllogistic reasoning errors was due to what?
People don’t properly interpret/apprehended the premises as the author intended.
Johnson-Laird created what as a sequence of processing steps for syllogistic reasoning?
The mental models framework
The mental model suggests that reasoning involves three stages. What are they?
Comprehension
Description
Validation
How is comprehension involved in reasoning according to the MMF?
This is when we use our language and background knowledge to construct a mental model of the state of the world (the scenario) that is implied by the premises.
How is Description involved in reasoning according to the MMF?
This is when we combine the models implied by the premise into a composite and use this to try and draw conclusions beyond reiterating the premises
What is meant by Validation in reasoning according to the MMF?
This is when we search for alternative models, if they are all consistent with the conclusion then it can be judged as a valid conclusion.
according to the validation step, if a new model contradicts the conclusion we should reject it and do what?
Try and construct and alternative model that can be validated.
If a reasoner fails to consider all the alternative models the MMA predicts that they are less likely to what?
Draw the correct inference
Multiple model syllogisms will be easier to solve than what?
Single Model Syllogism
What is a multiple model syllogism?
This is a syllogism that has more than one way of combining the information in the premises
Give an example of a multiple model syllogism:
No Artists are Bakers
All Bakers are Candlemakers
What follows?
Some candlemakers are not artists.
The MMA also describes what happens when there is no valid conclusion. For example:
No Aardvarks are Bigots
No Bigots are Chocolate-lovers
What follows?
After having used all three steps there is no valid conclusion that can be reached that is consistent with both premises.
The MMA predicts that people with greater working memory will do what?
Perform better on the task, i.e reach the correct conclusion
Copeland and Radvansky (2004) tested the prediction of the MMA. Outline the study they conducted.
- First they gave PP a working memory span assessment
- They then gave the PP’s a
- All cyclists are coffee drinkers;
- All coffee drinkers are surgeons”
- And 9 possible conclusions (the 8 combinations of
the two end terms “Cyclists” and “Surgeons” with the four quantifiers “All”, “None”, “Some”
and “Some…not”, plus the option “no valid conclusion”).
What were the findings of the Copeland and Radvansky (2004) study?
People with higher WM were generally more accurate and quicker at solving the reasoning tasks.
- Suggesting it is a resource intensive activity
The MMA better predicted the response choice compared to what?
Simple heuristics such as atmosphere theory.
Problems that have more possible mental models would be solved less accurately because people fail to what?
consider all the possible states implied by the premises
What is the key issue with the MMA?
What determines how the initial model was created?
What is meant by considering the role of framing and experience in reasoning?
syllogistic reasoning will be influenced by how a person frames the problem and the persons prior experiences.
Who investigated the role of framing and experience in reasoning?
Evans et al.1984
What did the evans et al. 1984 study find will influence the judged validity of both valid and invalid arguments?
The plausibility of the argument
judgement about an arguments validity will be influenced by what two things?
- Beliefs about the conclusions themselves
- The probability that the conclusions will be true
What is the belief bias?
This is when judgments about an arguments validity are influenced by beliefs both about the conclusions themselves and also about the probability that these conclusions will be true.
How can we explain the belief bias?
The selective scrutiny hypotheses
What is the selective scrutiny hypotheses?
a heuristic approach to reasoning
Explain the SSH?
Suggests that when reasoning people will firstly evaluate the plausibility of the conclusion
- If it seems reasonable they accept it without actually reasoning about it
- Only If the conclusions is unbelievable that is when we actually scrutinise the logical relationships between premise and conclusion
- Hence the “selectiveness” of scrutiny
How is the SSH challenged?
It doesn’t always apply. Analysis from Klauer (2000)
- Validity will affect whether or not be accept a believable argument.
- as in people will reject invalid arguments even if they have plausible conclusions
What is meant by the misinterpreted necessity hypothesis?
This suggests that people don’t know how to respond when a conclusion is possible but not logically necessary.
Thus people might use believability to make their decision.
How is the misinterpreted necessity hypothesis challenged?
Belief will influence acceptance even when the conclusions are deductively valid, thus it is not limited to indeterminate uncertainty.
What two separate effects will belief exert on reasoning?
1) It can induce overall bias to accept/reject the conclusions
2) Belief can also shape the reasoning process itself.
Who developed a framework that incorporated the idea that belief has two separate effects on reasoning?
Klauer et al. 2000
rather than belief influencing judgement before reasoning (selective scrutiny) or after reasoning ( misinterpreted necessity) Klauer argued that belief has what?
Two separate effects on reasoning
What are the basic ideas/levels of Klauers model?
- People will initially generate one mental model
- If the conclusion is believable people will try and create a model that is consistent with this claim
- If the conclusion is unbelievable they will try and create a model that refutes the claim
- If this attempt to create a desire model fails, the PP will likely be uncertain and thus their reasoning will be swayed by their belief about the base rate probability that the conclusion is valid.
Klauers at al.2000 model goes to suggest that people reason with operations that are shaped by what?
Prior beliefs and biases
What is meant by propositional reasoning?
This is reasoning that involves propositions containing conditionals
What are common conditionals?
If, And, Not and OR
What are the two names for a valid type of inference?
The modus ponens and Modus Tollens
What is meant by the denial of the antecedent?
This is when the conditional response is denied
