scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Abductive reasoning

About: Abductive reasoning is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1917 publications have been published within this topic receiving 44645 citations. The topic is also known as: abduction & abductive inference.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The process of information retrieval in abductive reasoning, which was previously believed to be unobservable, is assessed using memory indexing, an eye-tracking method that makes it possible to trace the retrieval of explanations currently held in working memory.
Abstract: Sequential abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. Explanations can be multicausal and require the retrieval of previously found ones from memory. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR) allows detailed predictions on what information is stored and retrieved from memory during reasoning. In the research to date, however, these predictions have never been directly tested. In this study, we tested process assumptions such as the construction of a mental representation from TAR using memory indexing, an eye-tracking method that makes it possible to trace the retrieval of explanations currently held in working memory. Gaze analysis revealed that participants encode the presented evidence (i.e., observations) together with possible explanations into memory. When new observations are presented, the previously presented evidence and explanations are retrieved. Observations that are not explained immediately are encoded as abstractly explained. Abstract explanations enter a refinement process in which they become concrete before they enter the situation model. With the memory indexing method, we were able to assess the process of information retrieval in abductive reasoning, which was previously believed to be unobservable. We discuss the results in the light of TAR and other current theories on the diagnostic reasoning process.

2 citations

Book ChapterDOI
Dingzhou Fei1
25 Oct 2018
TL;DR: This article attempts to define this reasoning process from the perspective of psychology and takes it seriously in its universal significance in the entire design process.
Abstract: Design synthesis is a process of cognitive development that aims to manage complexity or seek to avoid confusion. Design is always a comprehensive synthesis of market demand, technology trends and business needs. In the synthesis process, designers attempt to organize, manipulate, trim, and filter the collected data to form a cohesive conceptual construction system. The design synthesis reveals cohesion and continuity; the combination shows the improvement of the organization, the reduction of complexity and the formation of idealized clarity and conceptualization. However, this cognitive synthesis is often not so obvious or even completely hidden. This article attempts to define this reasoning process from the perspective of psychology and takes it seriously in its universal significance in the entire design process. This paper investigates that the following claims: (1) There are three types of applicability of abductive reasoning for design synthesis including: identification of implicit design targets, idealization of innovative design concepts, and diagnosis of violating design constraints or design axioms. These three components have a common basis: conceptualization and reconceptualization. They can be taken as sense making from chaos and uncertainty. (2) Synthesis is an abductive thinking process. Abductive reasoning related to insight and creative problem solving, and it is this creative problem solving that is at the heart of the design synthesis methods. (3) Conceptualization relates three specific sub-processes: prioritizing, judging, and forging. Conceptualization is changeable.

2 citations

31 Aug 2017
TL;DR: In this paper, historical epistemology and methodological practices are better understood as a form of situated scholarly inquiry in which the researcher interprets or analyzes the past from a position in the present through a process of abductive reasoning.
Abstract: Historical research in organization and management studies continues to be described as a type of inductive theory building from cases. But historical epistemology and methodological practices are better understood as a form of situated scholarly inquiry in which the researcher interprets or analyzes the past from a position in the present through a process of abductive reasoning. This chapter elaborates on the implications of the situated character of historical reasoning for the nature of historical knowledge claims, and for the methodological practices involved in scholarly historical research, including the treatment of evidence, the establishment of explanations, the attempt at understanding, and the foundations for evaluative conclusions. It concludes by considering the implications for the role of historical discourse within management and organization studies more broadly.

2 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The results provide evidence that people experience differences in task difficulty when more information has to be retrieved from memory, and suggest that individuals construct their situation model from both information in memory as well as external memory stores.
Abstract: Abductive reasoning describes the process of deriving an explanation from given observations. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR; Johnson and Krems, Cognitive Science 25:903–939, 2001) assumes that when information is presented sequentially, new information is integrated into a mental representation, a situation model, the central data structure on which all reasoning processes are based. Because working memory capacity is limited, the question arises how reasoning might change with the amount of information that has to be processed in memory. Thus, we conducted an experiment (N = 34) in which we manipulated whether previous observation information and previously found explanations had to be retrieved from memory or were still visually present. Our results provide evidence that people experience differences in task difficulty when more information has to be retrieved from memory. This is also evident in changes in the mental representation as reflected by eye tracking measures. However, no differences are found between groups in the reasoning outcome. These findings suggest that individuals construct their situation model from both information in memory as well as external memory stores. The complexity of the model depends on the task: when memory demands are high, only relevant information is included. With this compensation strategy, people are able to achieve similar reasoning outcomes even when faced with tasks that are more difficult. This implies that people are able to adapt their strategy to the task in order to keep their reasoning successful.

2 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, two kinds of fuzzy abductive inference in the framework of fuzzy rule base are proposed, which depend on the semantic of the rule, and they distinguish two classes of interpretation of a fuzzy rule, certainty generation rules and possible generation rules.
Abstract: This paper proposes two kinds of fuzzy abductive inference in the framework of fuzzy rule base. The abductive inference processes described here depend on the semantic of the rule. We distinguish two classes of interpretation of a fuzzy rule, certainty generation rules and possible generation rules. In this paper we present the architecture of abductive inference in the first class of interpretation. We give two kinds of problem that we can resolve by using the proposed models of inference.

2 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Natural language
31.1K papers, 806.8K citations
82% related
Ontology (information science)
57K papers, 869.1K citations
79% related
Inference
36.8K papers, 1.3M citations
76% related
Heuristics
32.1K papers, 956.5K citations
76% related
Social network
42.9K papers, 1.5M citations
75% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
202356
2022103
202156
202059
201956
201867