5 found
Order:
  1.  32
    Strategies in Relational Inference.Maxwell J. Roberts - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (1):1 – 26.
    Three experiments are reported in which the relationships between task format, item type, and strategy usage were investigated for a two-dimensional relational inference task. Contrary to past findings with linear syllogisms, it was found that parallel presentation (presenting problem statements simultaneously) did not result in any increased use of deduction rule processes compared with serial presentation (presenting problem statements individually). Instead, the results suggested that mental models were used by the majority of subjects, and that multiple models were more likely (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  2.  28
    Quantifier Interpretation and Syllogistic Reasoning.Maxwell J. Roberts, Stephen E. Newstead & Richard A. Griggs - 2001 - Thinking and Reasoning 7 (2):173 – 204.
    Many researchers have suggested that premise interpretation errors can account, at least in part, for errors on categorical syllogisms. However, although it is possible to show that people make such errors in simple inference tasks, the evidence for them is far less clear when actual syllogisms are administered. Part of the problem is due to the lack of clear predictions for the solutions that would be expected when using modified quantifiers, assuming that correct inferences are made from them. This paper (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  3.  22
    Context, Visual Salience, and Inductive Reasoning.Maxwell J. Roberts, Heather Welfare, Doreen P. Livermore Iv & Alice M. Theadom - 2000 - Thinking and Reasoning 6 (4):349-374.
  4.  16
    Individual Differences Transcend the Rationality Debate.Elizabeth J. Newton & Maxwell J. Roberts - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):530-531.
    Individual differences are indeed an important aid to our understanding of human cognition, but the importance of the rationality debate is open to question. An understanding of the process involved, and how and why differences occur, is fundamental to our understanding of human reasoning and decision making.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  25
    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   1 citation