Order:
  1.  37
    Bayesian reasoning with ifs and ands and ors.Nicole Cruz, Jean Baratgin, Mike Oaksford & David E. Over - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
  2. Philosophy and the Psychology of Conditional Reasoning.David Over & Nicole Cruz - 2019 - In Andrew Aberdein & Matthew Inglis (eds.), Advances in Experimental Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics. Bloomsbury Academic. pp. 225-249.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3.  17
    Widening Access to Bayesian Problem Solving.Nicole Cruz, Saoirse Connor Desai, Stephen Dewitt, Ulrike Hahn, David Lagnado, Alice Liefgreen, Kirsty Phillips, Toby Pilditch & Marko Tešić - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
  4.  42
    Corrigendum: Bayesian reasoning with ifs and ands and ors.Nicole Cruz, Jean Baratgin, Mike Oaksford & David E. Over - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
  5.  13
    Explaining Away, Augmentation, and the Assumption of Independence.Nicole Cruz, Ulrike Hahn, Norman Fenton & David Lagnado - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  29
    The Impact Factor Fallacy.Frieder M. Paulus, Nicole Cruz & Sören Krach - 2018 - Frontiers in Psychology 9:324900.
    The use of the journal impact factor (JIF) as a measure for the quality of individual manuscripts and the merits of scientists has faced significant criticism in recent years. We add to the current criticism in arguing that such an application of the JIF in policy and decision making in academia is based on false beliefs and unwarranted inferences. To approach the problem, we use principles of deductive and inductive reasoning to illustrate the fallacies that are inherent to using journal (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7.  10
    Conceptual clarity and empirical testability: Commentary on Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda (2023).Nicole Cruz - 2023 - Thinking and Reasoning 29 (3):396-408.
    Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda (2022) criticise the use of the term “new paradigm” in the psychology of reasoning and raise important issues about how to advance research in the field. In this commentary I argue that for the latter it would be helpful to clarify further the concepts that reasoning theories rely on, and to strengthen the links between the theories and the empirical observations that would and would not be compatible with them.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark