Journal ArticleDOI
Reasoning under time pressure: a study of causal conditional inference
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
It is suggested that the belief bias in conditional inference is less open to volitional control than that associated with syllogistic reasoning.Abstract:
In this study, we examine the role of beliefs in conditional inference in two experiments, demonstrating a robust tendency for people to make fewer inferences from statements they disbelieve, regardless of logical validity. The main purpose of this study was to test whether participants are able to inhibit this belief effect where it constitutes a bias. This is the case when participants are specifically instructed to assume the truth of the premises. However, Experiment 1 showed that the effect is no less marked than when this instruction is given, than when it is not, although higher ability participants did show slightly less influence of belief (Experiment 2). Contrary to the findings with syllogistic reasoning, use of speeded tasks had no effect on the extent of the belief bias (both experiments), although it did considerably reduce the numbers of inferences that were drawn overall. These findings suggest that the belief bias in conditional inference is less open to volitional control than that associated with syllogistic reasoning.read more
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Intuition, reason, and metacognition
TL;DR: Data support a model in which a metacognitive judgment about a first, initial model determines the extent of analytic engagement, and were consistently predicted by the fluency with which the initial answer was produced, providing a link to the wider literature on metamemory.
Journal ArticleDOI
Theory and Metatheory in the Study of Dual Processing: Reply to Comments
TL;DR: This article responds to four commentators who suggest that the proposed account of dual-process theory is untestable and less interesting than the broad theory that has been critiqued in recent literature.
Journal ArticleDOI
Logic, beliefs, and instruction: a test of the default interventionist account of belief bias.
TL;DR: This article presents the results of 5 experiments in which participants were instructed to evaluate the conclusions of logical arguments on the basis of either their logical validity or their believability, and discusses the implications for default interventionist accounts of belief bias.
Posted Content
AI safety via debate.
TL;DR: This work proposes training agents via self play on a zero sum debate game, focusing on potential weaknesses as the model scales up, and proposes future human and computer experiments to test these properties.
Journal ArticleDOI
Evidence Against Decay in Verbal Working Memory
TL;DR: It is concluded that time-based decay does not contribute to the capacity limit of verbal working memory.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition
TL;DR: This article reviews a diverse set of proposals for dual processing in higher cognition within largely disconnected literatures in cognitive and social psychology and suggests that while some dual-process theories are concerned with parallel competing processes involving explicit and implicit knowledge systems, others are concerns with the influence of preconscious processes that contextualize and shape deliberative reasoning and decision-making.
Book
Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment
TL;DR: In this article, a review is presented of the book "Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, edited by Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, and Daniel Kahneman".
Journal ArticleDOI
The empirical case for two systems of reasoning.
TL;DR: The distinction between rule-based and associative systems of reasoning has been discussed extensively in cognitive psychology as discussed by the authors, where the distinction is based on the properties that are normally assigned to rules.
Journal ArticleDOI
Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined the implica- tions of individual differences in performance for each of the four explanations of the normative/descriptive gap, including performance errors, computational limitations, the wrong norm being applied by the experi- menter, and a different construal of the task by the subject.
Book ChapterDOI
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Daniel Kahneman,Shane Frederick +1 more
TL;DR: The program of research now known as the heuristics and biases approach began with a survey of 84 participants at the 1969 meetings of the Mathematical Psychology Society and the American Psychological Association (Tversky & Kahneman, 1971) as discussed by the authors.