Matching bias and set sizes: A discussion of Yama (2001)

Thinking and Reasoning

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 153-163

  Evans, Jonathan St B T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4644350170     PISSN: 13546783     EISSN: 14640708     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13546780143000152     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Evans, J. St. B. T., 1995. “ Relevance and reasoning ”. In Perspectives on thinking and reasoning, Edited by: Newstead, S. E., and Evans, J. St. B. T., 147–172. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
2. Evans, J. St. B. T., 1998. Matching bias in conditional reasoning: Do we understand it after 25 years?. Thinking and Reasoning, 4: 45–82.
3. Evans, J. St. B. T., Clibbens, J., and Rood, B., 1996. The role of implicit and explicit negation in conditional reasoning bias. Journal of Memory and Language, 35: 392–409.
4. Evans, J. St. B. T., and Handley, S. J., 1999. The role of negation in conditional inference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A: 739–769.
5. Evans, J. St. B. T., Newstead, S. E., and Byrne, R. M. J., 1993. Human reasoning: The psychology of deduction, Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
6. Evans, J. St. B. T., and Over, D. E., 1996a. Rationality in the selection task: Epistemic utility versus uncertainty reduction. Psychological Review, 103: 356–363.
7. Evans, J. St. B. T., and Over, D. E., 1996b. Rationality and reasoning, Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
8. Green, D. W., Over, D. E., and Pyne, R., 1997. Probability and choice in the selection task. Thinking and Reasoning, 3: 209–236.
9. Kirby, K. N., 1994. Probabilities and utilities of fictional outcomes in Wason's four card selection task. Cognition, 51: 1–28.
10. Nickerson, R. S., 1996. Hempel's paradox and the Wason selection task: Logical and psychological puzzles of confirmation. Thinking and Reasoning, 2: 1–32.
11. Oaksford, M., and Chafer, N., 1994. A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 107: 608–631.
12. Oaksford, M., and Chater, N., 1995. Information gain explains relevance which explains the selection task. Cognition, 57: 97–108.
13. Oaksford, M., Chater, N., and Grainger, B., 1999. Probabilistic effects in data selection. Thinking and Reasoning, 5: 193–244.
14. Schaeken, W., and Schroyens, W., 2000. The effect of explicit negatives and different contrast classes on conditional syllogisms. British Journal of Psychology, 91: 533–550.
15. Sperber, D., Cara, F., and Girotto, V., 1995. Relevance theory explains the selection task. Cognition, 57: 31–95.
16. Stanovich, K. E., 1999. Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
17. Wason, P. C., 1966. “ Reasoning ”. In New horizons in psychology I, Edited by: Foss, B. M., 106–137. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
18. Yama, H., 2001. Matching versus optimal data selection in the Wason selection task. Thinking and Reasoning, 7: 295–311.