Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. How the social environment shaped the evolution of mind.Denise Dellarosa Cummins - 2000 - Synthese 122 (1-2):3 - 28.
    Dominance hierarchies are ubiquitous in the societies of human and non-human animals. Evidence from comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychological investigations is presented that show how social dominance hierarchies shaped the evolution of the human mind, and hence, human social institutions. It is argued that the pressures that arise from living in hierarchical social groups laid a foundation of fundamental concepts and cognitive strategies that are crucial to surviving in social dominance hierarchies. These include recognizing and reasoning transitively about dominance relations, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The task-specific nature of domain-general reasoning.Valerie A. Thompson - 2000 - Cognition 76 (3):209-268.
  • The Affective Self-regulation of Covert and Overt Reasoning in a Promotion vs. Prevention Mind-set.Marta Roczniewska & Alina Kolańczyk - 2015 - Polish Psychological Bulletin 46 (2):228-238.
    The main hypothesis of studies presented in this article is that episodic implicit evaluations toward task-relevant objects determine thinking and decisions by actively placing them within or outside the scope of attention. In these studies we also aimed to test the impact of regulatory focus on implicit evaluations and goal pursuit. We applied the Promotion-Prevention Self-control Scale as a measure of mind-set during thinking in the Wason Selection Task in Study 1 and Island Decision Game in Study 2. Directly after (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Context, visual salience, and inductive reasoning.Maxwell J. Roberts, Heather Welfare, Doreen P. Livermore & Alice M. Theadom - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (4):349 – 374.
    An important debate in the reasoning literature concerns the extent to which inference processes are domain-free or domain-specific. Typically, evidence in support of the domain-specific position comprises the facilitation observed when abstract reasoning tasks are set in realistic context. Three experiments are reported here in which the sources of facilitation were investigated for contextualised versions of Raven's Progressive Matrices (Richardson, 1991) and non-verbal analogies from the AH4 test (Richardson & Webster, 1996). Experiment 1 confirmed that the facilitation observed for the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Reasoning with deontic and counterfactual conditionals.Ana Cristina Quelhas & Ruth Byrne - 2003 - Thinking and Reasoning 9 (1):43 – 65.
    We report two new phenomena of deontic reasoning: (1) For conditionals with deontic content such as, "If the nurse cleaned up the blood then she must have worn rubber gloves", reasoners make more modus tollens inferences (from "she did not wear rubber gloves" to "she did not clean up the blood") compared to conditionals with epistemic content. (2) For conditionals in the subjunctive mood with deontic content, such as, "If the nurse had cleaned up the blood then she must have (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Deontic Reasoning With Emotional Content: Evolutionary Psychology or Decision Theory?Nick Perham & Mike Oaksford - 2005 - Cognitive Science 29 (5):681-718.
    Three experiments investigated the contrasting predictions of the evolutionary and decision-theoretic approaches to deontic reasoning. Two experiments embedded a hazard management (HM) rule in a social contract scenario that should lead to competition between innate modules. A 3rd experiment used a pure HM task. Threatening material was also introduced into the antecedent, p, of a deontic rule, if p then must q. According to the evolutionary approach, more HM responses (Cosmides & Tooby, 2000) are predicted when p is threatening, whereas (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Superordinate principles in reasoning with causal and deontic conditionals.K. I. Manktelow & N. Fairley - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (1):41 – 65.
    We propose that the pragmatic factors that mediate everyday deduction, such as alternative and disabling conditions (e.g. Cummins et al., 1991) and additional requirements (Byrne, 1989) exert their effects on specific inferences because of their perceived relevance to more general principles, which we term SuperPs. Support for this proposal was found first in two causal inference experiments, in which it was shown that specific inferences were mediated by factors that are relevant to a more general principle, while the same inferences (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Sharing-rule and detection of free-riders in cooperative groups: Evolutionarily important deontic reasoning in the Wason selection task.Kai Hiraishi & Toshikazu Hasegawa - 2001 - Thinking and Reasoning 7 (3):255 – 294.
    Taking a Darwinian approach, we propose that people reason to detect free-riders on the Wason Selection task with the sharing-rule; If one receives the resource, one is an in-group member (standard), or If one is an in-group member, one receives the resource (switched). As predicted, taking the resource-provider's perspective, both undergraduates and children (11 to 12 years old) checked for the existence of out-group members taking undeserved resource. Changing the perspective to that of the resource-recipient did not alter the selection (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Probability and choice in the selection task.David W. Green, David E. Over & Robin A. Pyne - 1997 - Thinking and Reasoning 3 (3):209-235.
    Two experiments using a realistic version of the selection task examined the relationship between participants' probability estimates of finding a counter example and their selections. Experiment 1 used everyday categories in the context of a scenario to determine whether or not the number of instances in a category affected the estimated probability of a counter-example. Experiment 2 modified the scenario in order to alter participants' estimates of finding a specific counter-example. Unlike Kirby 1994a, but consistent with his proposals, both studies (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Inept reasoners or pragmatic virtuosos? Relevance and the deontic selection task.Vittorio Girotto, Markus Kemmelmeier, Dan Sperber & Jean-Baptiste van der Henst - 2001 - Cognition 81 (2):B69-B76.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Cognitive ability and variation in selection task performance.Keith E. Stanovich & Richard F. West - 1998 - Thinking and Reasoning 4 (3):193-230.
    Individual differences in performance on a variety of selection tasks were examined in three studies employing over 800 participants. Nondeontic tasks were solved disproportionately by individuals of higher cognitive ability. In contrast, responses on two deontic tasks that have shown robust performance facilitationthe Drinking-age Problem and the Sears Problem-were unrelated to cognitive ability. Performance on deontic and nondeontic tasks was consistently associated. Individuals in the correct/correct cell of the bivariate performance matrix were over-represented. That is, individuals giving the modal response (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Traces of reasoning with pragmatic schemas.George L. Dunbar - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (2):173 – 181.
    Holyoak and Cheng 's account of Wason's selection task was evaluated by testing participants' recognition memory for the rule. To accommodate the finding that participants' selections are systematically influenced by manipulating their perspective on the rule to be tested, Holyoak and Cheng put forward a development of Pragmatic Reasoning Schema theory, according to which the rule being tested is mapped onto different schematic rules depending on the perspective taken. The instantiated schema then becomes the basis for reasoning, and the different (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Confirmational Holism and Theory Choice: Arrow Meets Duhem.Eleonora Cresto & Diego Tajer - 2020 - Mind 129 (513):71-111.
    In a recent paper Samir Okasha has suggested an application of Arrow’s impossibility theorem to theory choice. When epistemic virtues are interpreted as ‘voters’ in charge of ranking competing theories, and there are more than two theories at stake, the final ordering is bound to coincide with the one proposed by one of the voters, provided a number of seemingly reasonable conditions are in place. In a similar spirit, Jacob Stegenga has shown that Arrow’s theorem applies to the amalgamation of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Precis of the rational imagination: How people create alternatives to reality.Ruth Mj Byrne - 2007 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (5):439-452.
    The human imagination remains one of the last uncharted terrains of the mind. People often imagine how events might have turned out something had been different. The of reality, those aspects more readily changed, indicate that counterfactual thoughts are guided by the same principles as rational thoughts. In the past, rationality and imagination have been viewed as opposites. But research has shown that rational thought is more imaginative than cognitive scientists had supposed. In The Rational Imagination, I argue that imaginative (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Understanding conditional promises and threats.Sieghard Beller, Andrea Bender & Gregory Kuhnmünch - 2005 - Thinking and Reasoning 11 (3):209-238.
    Conditional promises and threats are speech acts that are used to manipulate other people's behaviour. Studies on human reasoning typically use propositional logic to analyse what people infer from such inducements. While this approach is sufficient to uncover conceptual features of inducements, it fails to explain them. To overcome this limitation, we propose a multilevel analysis integrating motivational, linguistic, deontic, behavioural, and emotional aspects. Commonalities and differences between conditional promises and threats on various levels were examined in two experiments. The (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Does the selection task detect cheater-detection?Dan Sperber - unknown
    Evolutionary psychology—in its ambitious version well formulated by Cosmides and Tooby (e.g., Cosmides & Tooby 1987, Tooby & Cosmides 1992) —will succeed to the extent that it causes cognitive psychologists to rethink central aspects of human cognition in an evolutionary perspective, to the extent, that is, that psychology in general becomes evolutionary. The human species is exceptional by its massive investment in cognition, and in forms of cognitive activity—language, metarepresentation, abstract thinking—that are as unique to humans as echolocation is unique (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Integrating Philosophy of Understanding with the Cognitive Sciences.Kareem Khalifa, Farhan Islam, J. P. Gamboa, Daniel Wilkenfeld & Daniel Kostić - 2022 - Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 16.
    We provide two programmatic frameworks for integrating philosophical research on understanding with complementary work in computer science, psychology, and neuroscience. First, philosophical theories of understanding have consequences about how agents should reason if they are to understand that can then be evaluated empirically by their concordance with findings in scientific studies of reasoning. Second, these studies use a multitude of explanations, and a philosophical theory of understanding is well suited to integrating these explanations in illuminating ways.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations