The impact of necessity and sufficiency in the Wason four-card selection task

Psychological Science

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 237-242

  Ahn, Woo Kyoung ^a   Graham, Loranel M ^b  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346542773     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9280.00143     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Agresti, A. (1990). Categorical data analysis. New York: Wiley.
2. Cheng, P.N., & Holyoak, K.J. (1985). Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 391-416.
3. Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31, 187-276.
4. Evans, J.St.B.T. (1982). The psychology of deductive reasoning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
5. Gigerenzer, G., & Hug, K. (1992) Domain-specific reasoning: Social contracts, cheating, and perspective change. Cognition, 43, 127-171.
6. Graham, L. (1995). A two-component theory of conditional reasoning: Content and process in the Wason four-card selection task. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
7. Graham, L., & Ahn, W. (1996). Necessity and sufficiency as an account for biases in Wason's card selection task. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 552-555). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Griggs, R.A. (1983). The role of problem content in the selection task and in the THOG problem. In J.St.B.T. Evans (Ed.), Thinking and reasoning: Psychological approaches (pp. 16-43). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
9. Henle, M. (1962). On the relation between logic and thinking. Psychological Review, 69, 366-378.
10. Holyoak, K.J., & Cheng, P.W. (1995). Pragmatic reasoning with a point of view. Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 289-313.
11. Johnson-Laird, P.N., & Byrne, R.M.J. (1991). Deduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Manktelow, K.I., & Over, D.E. (1987). Reasoning and rationality. Mind and Language, 2, 199-219.
13. Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101, 608-631.
14. Platt, R.D., & Griggs, R.A. (1995). Facilitation and matching bias in the abstract selection task. Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 55-70.
15. Rips, L.J. (1994). The psychology of proof. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Sperber, D., Cara, F., & Girotto, V. (1995). Relevance theory explains the selection task. Cognition, 57, 31-95.
17. Thompson, V.A. (1994). Interpretational factors in conditional reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 22, 742-758.
18. Thompson, V.A. (1995). Conditional reasoning: The necessary and sufficient conditions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 1-58.
19. Wason, P.C. (1966). Reasoning. In B.M. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
20. Wason, P.C. (1968). Reasoning about a rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 273-281.