Task 4

Question 1

Watson 2-4-6 task

Answer 1

Presented participants with a rule involving three numbers in ascending order. Participants had to propose sets of
numbers and determine if they conformed to this rule.

Question 2

Experiment DAX and MED rules

Tweney et al.

Answer 2

Tweney et al. (1980) modified the task by introducing two rules (DAX and MED) and found that over 50% of participants
correctly identified the DAX rule on their first attempt
* DAX Rule: The DAX rule was any set of three numbers in ascending order
* MED Rule: The MED rule covered all other sets of numbers that did not fit the DAX rule.
* In the study, after each set of numbers proposed by the participants, they were informed whether the set fit the DAX rule or the MED rule

Question 3

Modus Ponens (Affirming the Antecedent)

Answer 3

If P, then Q. P is true. Therefore, Q is true

Question 4

Modus Tollens (Denying the Consequent)

Answer 4

If P, then Q. Q is not true. Therefore, P is not true.

Question 5

Affirmation of the Consequent

Answer 5

Accepting a conclusion as valid based on a premise that doesn’t necessarily
lead to that conclusion

Question 6

Denial of the Antecedent

Answer 6

Incorrectly inferring that if a condition is not met, the consequent cannot occur

Question 7

Klauer’s Dual-source model of conditional reasoning

Answer 7

Proposes two processes in conditional reasoning:
1) A knowledge-based process influenced by premise content
2) A form-based process influenced by the form of the premises

Question 8

Verschuren’s dual-process model of individual differences in conditional reasoning

Answer 8

Emphasizes the role of individual differences in how people approach and solve reasoning problems. This model
distinguishes between two types of cognitive strategies used in conditional reasoning:
1) Counterexample Strategy: Reasoners using this method consider a conclusion invalid if they can think
of a counterexample that contradicts it.
2) Intuitive Statistical Strategy: Instead of looking for counterexamples, this approach involves
assessing the likelihood or probability of a conclusion being true based on the given information

Question 9

Watson Selection Task

Answer 9

Asked to confirm a the rule that a card with an R on the front always has a 2 on the back and vice versa. How many cards do you have to turn and which?

Question 10

Matching bias

Answer 10

Affects decision-making, leading participants to choose cards that directly match items in the rule during Watson Selection task

Question 11

Johnson-Laird’s mental model theory and the Watson Selection task

Answer 11

This theory assumes that selections on Wason’s selection task depend on two processes:
1) There is an intuitive process producing selections matching the reasoners’ hypothesis
2) There is a more deliberate process producing selections of potential counterexamples to the
hypothesis

Question 12

Mental Model Theory

Answer 12

• Mental models are created from given information, generating possible conclusions.
• The process includes attempting to find counterexamples to refute conclusions. If none are found, the conclusion is deemed valid.
• Working memory’s limited capacity influences the construction of mental models.
• Complexity increases when multiple models are required for a problem.

Question 13

Informal reasoning

Answer 13

A form of reasoning based on one’s knowledge and experience rather than logic.

Question 14

Solution aversion

Answer 14

A bias in reasoning in which individuals deny the existence of a problem (e.g., climate change) because they
dislike the proposed solution (e.g., restricting damaging emissions)

Question 15

Myside bias

Answer 15

In informal reasoning, the tendency to select and interpret information in terms of one’s own beliefs or to generate reasons or arguments supporting those beliefs

Question 16

Mercier’s argumentative theory

Answer 16

Claims that reason has evolved so that humans can exchange justifications and arguments with each other, and that the function of those arguments is to convince people.

Question 17

Bayesian approach to reasoning

Answer 17

Prior beliefs have subjective probabilities associated with them based on our knowledge and experience. These probabilities are changed as we encounter new evidence

Question 18

Bounded rationality

Answer 18

The idea that people are as rational as the environment (e.g. information costs) and their limited processing capacity (e.g. limited attention) permi

Question 19

Normativism

Answer 19

The idea that human thinking should be regarded as “correct” or “incorrect” depending on how closely it follows
certain norms or standards (e.g., those of classical logic).

Question 20

Instrumental (thin) rationality

Answer 20

Maximizing the utility (subjective value) of one’s choices or decisions with respect to achieving task-related goals

Question 21

Broad rationality

Answer 21

Involves considering the individual’s personal goals and contextual factors (especially social ones) additional
to the immediate task-related goals

Question 22

Dunning-Kruger effect

Answer 22

The finding that less skilled individuals overestimate their abilities more than those who are more skilled. It’s possible that those showing the effect lack the knowledge and expertise to evaluate the correctness of their own thinking

Question 23

Stanovich’s tripartite model of reasoning

Answer 23

A dual-process model, which distinguishes between 2 forms of type 2 processing:
* Algorithmic mind: Contains information about rules, strategies and procedures that a person can retrieve from memory to aid decision making and problem solving. Can override the heuristic responses generated by the autonomous mind.
* Reflective mind: Makes use of an individual’s goals, beliefs and general knowledge. It makes the decision of whether to use type 2 processes.

Question 24

Motivated System 2 Reasoning (MS2R) account

Answer 24

• Deliberation protects political identities, increasing partisan bias.
• Highly numerate individuals more polarized on issues like climate change.
• Correlation between deliberativeness and polarization.