A Theory of If: A Lexical Entry, Reasoning Program, and Pragmatic Principles
TL;DR: The theory of conditional proof as discussed by the authors is based on a set of pragmatic principles that govern how an if sentence is likely to be interpreted in context, and it is defined by a lexical entry that defines the information about if in semantic memory.
Abstract: The theory has 3 parts: (a) A lexical entry defines the information about if in semantic memory; its core comprises 2 inferences schemas, Modus Ponens and a schema for Conditional Proof; the latter operates under a constraint that explains differences between if and the material conditional of standard logic. (b) A propositional-logic reasoning program specifies a routine for reasoning from information as interpreted to a conclusion. (c) A set of pragmatic principles governs how an if sentence is likely to be interpreted in context
Citations
More filters
01 Jan 2002
1,772 citations
TL;DR: The case is made that cognition in general, and human everyday reasoning in particular, is best viewed as solving probabilistic, rather than logical, inference problems, and the wider “probabilistic turn” in cognitive science and artificial intelligence is considered.
Abstract: According to Aristotle, humans are the rational animal. The borderline between rationality and irrationality is fundamental to many aspects of human life including the law, mental health, and language interpretation. But what is it to be rational? One answer, deeply embedded in the Western intellectual tradition since ancient Greece, is that rationality concerns reasoning according to the rules of logic - the formal theory that specifies the inferential connections that hold with certainty between propositions. Piaget viewed logical reasoning as defining the end-point of cognitive development; and contemporary psychology of reasoning has focussed on comparing human reasoning against logical standards. Bayesian Rationality argues that rationality is defined instead by the ability to reason about uncertainty. Although people are typically poor at numerical reasoning about probability, human thought is sensitive to subtle patterns of qualitative Bayesian, probabilistic reasoning. In Chapters 1-4 of Bayesian Rationality (Oaksford & Chater 2007), the case is made that cognition in general, and human everyday reasoning in particular, is best viewed as solving probabilistic, rather than logical, inference problems. In Chapters 5-7 the psychology of "deductive" reasoning is tackled head-on: It is argued that purportedly "logical" reasoning problems, revealing apparently irrational behaviour, are better understood from a probabilistic point of view. Data from conditional reasoning, Wason's selection task, and syllogistic inference are captured by recasting these problems probabilistically. The probabilistic approach makes a variety of novel predictions which have been experimentally confirmed. The book considers the implications of this work, and the wider "probabilistic turn" in cognitive science and artificial intelligence, for understanding human rationality.
713 citations
TL;DR: In a celebrated trial, Harr as discussed by the authors elicited the following information from an expert witness about the source of a chemical pollutant trichloroethylene (TCE): If the TCE in the wells had been drawn from out of the river, then there would be TCE on the riverbed. But there was no TCE at all.
Abstract: You reason about conditional relations because much of your knowledge is conditional. If you get caught speeding, then you pay a fine. If you have an operation, then you need time to recuperate. If you have money in the bank, then you can cash a check. Conditional reasoning is a central part of thinking, yet people do not always reason correctly. The lawyer Jan Schlictmann in a celebrated trial (see Harr, 1995, pp. 361–362) elicited the following information from an expert witness about the source of a chemical pollutant trichloroethylene (TCE): If the TCE in the wells had been drawn from out of the river, then there’d be TCE in the riverbed. But there isn’t any TCE in the riverbed.
670 citations
TL;DR: The results strongly support social contract theory, contradict availability theory, and cannot be accounted for by pragmatic reasoning schema theory, which lacks the pragmatic concepts of perspectives and cheating detection.
611 citations
TL;DR: By devising appropriate rule-context pairs, this work predicts that correct performance can be elicited in any conceptual domain and corroborates this prediction with four experiments.
492 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1934
TL;DR: The Open Society and Its Enemies as discussed by the authors is regarded as one of Popper's most enduring books and contains insights and arguments that demand to be read to this day, as well as many of the ideas in the book.
Abstract: Described by the philosopher A.J. Ayer as a work of 'great originality and power', this book revolutionized contemporary thinking on science and knowledge. Ideas such as the now legendary doctrine of 'falsificationism' electrified the scientific community, influencing even working scientists, as well as post-war philosophy. This astonishing work ranks alongside The Open Society and Its Enemies as one of Popper's most enduring books and contains insights and arguments that demand to be read to this day.
7,904 citations
TL;DR: This article reviewed major advances in verbal reports over the past decade, including new evidence on how giving verbal reports affects subjects' cognitive processes, and on the validity and completeness of such reports.
Abstract: Since the publication of Ericsson and Simon's work in the early 1980s, verbal data has been used increasingly to study cognitive processes in many areas of psychology, and concurrent and retrospective verbal reports are now generally accepted as important sources of data on subjects' cognitive processes in specific tasks. In this revised edition of the book that put protocol analysis on firm theoretical ground, the authors review major advances in verbal reports over the past decade, including new evidence on how giving verbal reports affects subjects' cognitive processes, and on the validity and completeness of such reports. In a new preface Ericsson and Simon summarize the central issues covered in the book and provide an updated version of their information-processing model, which explains verbalization and verbal reports. They describe new studies on the effects of verbalization, interpreting the results of these studies and showing how their theory can be extended to account for them. Next, they address the issue of completeness of verbally reported information, reviewing the new evidence in three particularly active task domains. They conclude by citing recent contributions to the techniques for encoding protocols, raising general issues, and proposing directions for future research.
6,689 citations
"A Theory of If: A Lexical Entry, Re..." refers background in this paper
...It is precisely the content of working memory that information-processing theories take as accessible to consciousness (Ericsson & Simon, 1984)....
[...]
Book•
22 Mar 1984
TL;DR: In this article, the authors reviewed major advances in verbal reports over the past decade, including new evidence on how giving verbal reports affects subjects' cognitive processes, and on the validity and completeness of such reports.
Abstract: Since the publication of Ericsson and Simon's work in the early 1980s, verbal data has been used increasingly to study cognitive processes in many areas of psychology, and concurrent and retrospective verbal reports are now generally accepted as important sources of data on subjects' cognitive processes in specific tasks In this revised edition of the book that put protocol analysis on firm theoretical ground, the authors review major advances in verbal reports over the past decade, including new evidence on how giving verbal reports affects subjects' cognitive processes, and on the validity and completeness of such reports In a new preface Ericsson and Simon summarize the central issues covered in the book and provide an updated version of their information-processing model, which explains verbalization and verbal reports They describe new studies on the effects of verbalization, interpreting the results of these studies and showing how their theory can be extended to account for them Next, they address the issue of completeness of verbally reported information, reviewing the new evidence in three particularly active task domains They conclude by citing recent contributions to the techniques for encoding protocols, raising general issues, and proposing directions for future research
5,613 citations