TASK 4 - REASONING

Question 1

reasoning

Answer 1

= cognitive processes that transform given information (a set of premises) in order to reach conclusions

Question 2

deductive reasoning

Answer 2

= general –> specific
- deductive validity = when premises are true, you reason according to logical principles, then your conclusion cannot be wrong

Question 3

inductive reasoning

Answer 3

= specific –> general

• conclusion can contain new information
• inductive strength = argument has inductive strength if it is impossible for premises to be true and conclusion to be false

Question 4

inductive

- analogical reasoning

Answer 4

• apply found relationship/analogy to determine a solution
• verbal (“A is to B what C is to ___) + pictorial analogies
• series & matrix completion

Question 5

inductive

- hypothesis testing

Answer 5

• people tend to first develop a general idea of the rule, then construct examples
• 2-4-6 task (Wason): given a bunch of numbers; have to determine the rule only by offering examples, not by asking direct questions about the rule
• confirmation bias: people try to confirm their rule is true rather than trying to test/ falsify it
• positive testing: generating numbers that are instance for hypothesis

Question 6

deductive

- conditional/propositional reasoning

Answer 6

= if-then relations (A: antecedent, B: conclusion)

• proposition = claim that can be either true or false
• compound propositions: propositions formed by using logical connectives
  a) affirming antecedent = modus ponen: A √, B √
  b) denying antecedent: A x, B x
  c) affirming consequence: B √, A √
  d) denying consequence = modus tollens: B x, A x

Question 7

deductive

- syllogistic reasoning

Answer 7

= categorical syllogism: 3 premises that deal with classes of entities (include quantifiers)
1&2: state premises
- premises = propositions about which arguments are made
3: conclusion based on premises
- belief bias: tendency to accept invalid conclusions that are believable rather than believe valid conclusions that are unbelievable

Question 8

deductive/conditional reasoning

- Wason selection task

Answer 8

• must affirm modus ponens + tollens
• matching bias: tendency to select those cards explicitly mentioned in the rule
• confirmation bias: tendency to confirm own hypothesis rather than looking for other options

Question 9

conditional reasoning

- 2 systems, 4 processing strategies

Answer 9

system 1:
- pragmatic strategy: causal processing during conversation
- semantic strategy: use background knowledge
system 2:
- inhibitory strategy: inhibit pragmatic strategy and background knowledge
- generative strategy: combine inhibitory with abstract analytic processing; BEST ONE

Question 10

everyday reasoning

Answer 10

• implicit premises
• problems are not self-contained
• several possible answers which vary in quality
• rarely established procedures
• personal relevance
• goal-directed

Question 11

deductive

- mental model theory

Answer 11

mental model = representation of a possible state of affairs in the world

• principle of truth: construct mental models that represent explicitly only what is true + not what is false; minimise WM load
• -> confirmation bias
• people should use falsification

Question 12

limitations of mental model theory

Answer 12

x overestimate deductive reasoning + falsification
x processes are under-specified
x ignores individual differences
x doesn’t explain which pieces of background knowledge are used

Question 13

deductive

• dual-systems theory
• Kahneman

Answer 13

associative system 1:
- unconscious, fast
- heuristic-based
- parallel processing
- unlimited capacity
- independent of general intelligence
analytical system 2:
- deliberate, active, analytic
- rule-based
- serial processing (one problem at a time)
- limited by WM
- dependent on general intelligence

Question 14

heuristic-analytic theory

- Evans

Answer 14

heuristic processes (I): task features, current goal and background knowledge to construct single hypothetical possibility
analytic process (II): may or may not intervene to revise or replace mental model

Question 15

principles of heuristic-analytic theory

Answer 15

1. singularity principle: one model at a time
2. relevance principle: only consider what is relevant for mental model
3. satisfying principle: decide if mental model satisfies needs (analytic thinking)

Question 16

approaches to study reasoning

- componential approach

Answer 16

= analysing a task into its component cognitive processes (mental subroutines)
- performance components = individual cognitive processes (encode –> recognise + retrieve from memory –> infer relationship –> apply relationship)
- meta-components = executive processes used in planning, monitoring
- knowledge acquisition components = used whenever we acquire new information
x common source of error: inability to use certain performance or meta-components effectively

Question 17

approaches to study reasoning

- rules/heuristics approach

Answer 17

• reasoning = relies on special-purpose mental rules (like grammar) for inferences
  hypotheses:
• Cheng: people interpret problems in terms of what they are about, based on that use different schemata
• Braine: people can + do use same set of abstract rules in all situations
• Cosmides: social contract theory = especially good at tasks when content is construed in terms of social costs/benefits –> evolutionary adaptive mechanism
  x common source of error: failure to interpret a problem in terms of the appropriate rules

Question 18

approaches to study reasoning

- mental models approach

Answer 18

• reasoning = constructing models to depict premises (like mental images when you read)
• effective reasoning = assess first conclusion by attempting to construct an alternative model consistent with premises, not with the hypothesised conclusion
  x common source of error: failure to construct relevant models, failure to assess the implications of all the models found, failure to construct enough models

Question 19

brain parts

Answer 19

• broca’s area: deductive reasoning –> greater involvement of syntactical processing & working memory on deductive reasoning tasks
• left DLPFC: inductive reasoning; plan execution
• right DLPFC: plan generation
• left PFC: integrating relations (= to build mental representations that incorporate multiple propositions/ relationships)

Question 20

secularisation hypothesis (PRESENTATION)

Answer 20

= with more widespread access to formal education & technology a focus on natural explanations will increasingly compete with & displace supernatural explanations

• natural explanation: appeal to “observable + empirically verifiable phenomena of the physical/ material world”
• supernatural explanation: appeal to phenomena that “operate outside of/ are distinct from the natural world”

Question 21

explanatory co-existence

Answer 21

= when (1) natural + (2) supernatural explanations are generated to interpret the same events

1) natural explanation: appeal to “observable phenomena of the physical/ material world”
2) supernatural explanation: appeal to phenomena that “are distinct from the natural world”
- synthetic thinking: loose integration of natural + supernatural frameworks without in-depth consideration of how they might interact
- target-depending thinking: 2 explanations are used to account for distinct aspects of a given phenomenon; involves different kinds of causality
- integrated thinking: explanations become well-coordinated, use both explanations

Question 22

results of cross-cultural perspectives on explanatory co-existence

Answer 22

• human origins: no explanatory co-existence
• death: target-dependent thinking (mostly natural explanations)
• illness: synthetic thinking; explanatory co-existence 77%
• -> death + illness: people often unsatisfied with only natural explanations; seek to understand why these things happen to them/their loved ones –> death + illness show more explanatory coexistence