Cog- Thinking and reasoning


?
  • Created by: Amy
  • Created on: 20-12-21 19:31
View mindmap
  • Thinking and reasoning: Logical reasoning
    • Johnson- Laird and Byrne (1991)- deductive reasoning was central to activities such as formulating plans, determining the consequences of hypothesis, to interpret and formulate instructions, to pursue arguments and negotiations
    • Inductive reasoning- increases semantic info (rely on own extra/world knowledge), possible/plausable explanations but aren't necessarily true
    • Deductive reasoning- conclusions are necessarily true, deduction is always truth preserving , requires only the info presented in the premises (no use of additional knowledge), making the implicit become explicit
    • Categorical syllogisms
      • Consists of two premises and a conclusion and uses quantity terms like all, some, none etc
        • eg all artists are beekeepers, all beekeepers are chemists therefore all artists are chemists
      • Valid argument form- it is truth preserving so if the premises are true then the conclusion will be true
    • Truth vs Validity
      • Validity- the form of the argument rather than the content of it
    • Belief bias
      • We are seduced by the believability of conclusions rather than their validity
      • Symbols are used in place of sentences, typically p & q
      • Data from Evans et al (1983) shows clear evidence of belief bias
    • Propositional reasoning
      • A formal system of logic, symbols are used in place
      • Conclusions are reached via the application of 'logical operators' (eg if, then) or connectives and the rule of logic
      • Conditional reasoning- an aspect of propositional reasoning
        • Reasoning about the operator 'if, then'
        • The meaning of words used in logic is often different from their meaning in natural, everyday usage
          • Things are ever true or false in propositional logic- there is no in-between, may have some effect on how people reason and why they make errors
        • Inferences in conditional reasoning- 4 traditionally associated with conditionals
          • 1. Modus ponens- valid inference form, its truth preserving and will always yield true conclusions from true premises, If p then q therefore q
          • 2. Modus tollens- valid form, truth preserving, If p then q, not q therefore not p
            • longer so more likely has errors
          • 3. Affirmation of the consequent (AC)- invalid as it will jot necessarily always give  true conclusions from true premises, If p then q, q, therefor p
          • 4. Denial of the antecedent (DA)- invalid, we can use truth tables from logic to assess the validity of these arguments
            • If p then q, not p therefore not q
            • Reasonable but not in formal logic
    • Boole (1854)- the laws of logic are the laws of thoughts
    • When assessing human performance we can use: generation tasks, evaluation tasks, some form of logical problems
      • Studies have looked at the rate ps generate/ endorse the valid and invalid conclusions
        • Marcus and Rips (1979)- Modus ponens drawn almost universally, modus tollens less frequently, AC and DA sometimes
          • Evans et al (1993) reviewed many studies and reported similar rates
    • Theories of reasoning
      • Theory must account for pattern of performance  and  account for factors: competence, errors (biases), number of studies show an effect of content
      • Abstract Rule theories (Braine & O'Brien 1991 and Rips 1994 and Braine 1994)
        • People are rational- we have some rules of logic or specialised processes for logical thinking
        • Numerous versions of mental logic, not all the same (share some basic principles)
        • People make mistakes because: we misunderstand/ misinterpret the task (Henle 1962) or we lack the necessary rules of logic resource limitations
        • Braine's abstract rule theory
          • Comprehension component- must be converted to a mental representation that can be held in working memory
          • Incompatibility rules- check for inconsistent/ contradictory reasoning (such as concluding both p and not p)
          • Application of rule schemas

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Cognitive psychology resources »