Reasoning under time pressure: a study of causal conditional inference

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 56, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 77-83

  Evans, Jonathan St B T ^a   Handley, Simon J ^a   Bacon, Alison M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Causal inference; Conditionals; Speeded tasks

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LOGIC; MALE; MENTAL STRESS; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SHORT TERM MEMORY; THINKING;

ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CULTURE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); JUDGMENT; LOGIC; MALE; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; PROBLEM SOLVING; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; STRESS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; THINKING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 60749133788     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169.56.2.77     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ball, L. J., Wade, C. N., & Quayle, J. D. (2006). Effects of belief and logic on syllogistic reasoning: Eye-movement evidence for selective processing models. Experimental Psychology, 53, 77-86.
2. Campbell, J. I. D., & Thompson, V. A. (2002). More power to you: Simple power calculations for treatment effects with one degree of freedom. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 34, 332-337.
3. Colom, R., Rebollo, I., Palacios, A., Juan-Espinosa, M., & Kyllonen, P. C. (2004). Working memory is (almost) perfectly predicted by g. Intelligence, 32, 277-296.
4. Cummins, D. D., Lubart, T., Alksnis, O., & Rist, R. (1991). Conditional reasoning and causation. Memory & Cognition, 19, 274-282.
5. De Neys, W. (2006). Dual processing in reasoning - Two systems but one reasoner. Psychological Science, 17, 428-433.
6. De Neys, W., & Schaeken, W. (2007). When people are more logical under cognitive load. Experimental Psychology, 54, 128-133.
7. Dieussaert, K., Schaeken, W., & d'Ydewalle, G. (2002). The relative contribution of content and context factors on the interpretation of conditionals. Experimental Psychology, 49, 181-195.
8. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1977). Toward a statistical theory of reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 297-306.
9. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1984). Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 451-468.
10. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Brighton: Erlbaum.
11. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2006). The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 378-395.
12. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2007). Hypothetical thinking: Dual process in reasoning and judgement. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
13. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment and social cognition, Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
14. Evans, J. St. B. T., Barston, J. L., & Pollard, P. (1983). On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 11, 295-306.
15. Evans, J. St. B. T., & Curtis-Holmes, J. (2005). Rapid responding increases belief bias: Evidence for the dual-process theory of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 11, 382-389.
16. Evans, J. St. B. T., & Handley, S. J. (1999). The role of negation in conditional inference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 739-769.
17. Evans, J. St. B. T., Handley, S., Neilens, H., Bacon, A. M., & Over, D. E. (2007a). The influence of cognitive ability and instructional set on causal conditional inference. Unpublished manuscript, University of Plymouth, UK.
18. Evans, J. St. B. T., Handley, S., Neilens, H., & Over, D. E. (2007b). Thinking about conditionals: A study of individual differences. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1772-1784.
19. Evans, J. St. B. T.,Newstead, S. E., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1993). Human reasoning: The psychology of deduction. Hove, UK: Erlbaum.
20. Evans, J. St. B. T., & Over, D. E. (1996). Rationality and reasoning. Hove: Psychology Press.
21. George, C. (1995). The endorsement of the premises: Assumption-based or belief-based reasoning. British Journal of Psychology, 86, 93-111.
22. Heim, A. (1970). AH4 group test of general intelligence manual. London: Nelson.
23. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgement. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49-81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Klaczynski, P. A. (2000). Motivated scientific reasoning biases, epistemological beliefs, and theory polarization: A two-process approach to adolescent cognition. Child Development, 71, 1347-1366.
25. Klauer, K. C, Musch, J., & Naumer, B. (2000). On belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. Psychological Review, 107, 852-884.
26. Klauer, K. C, Stahl, C, & Erdfelder, E. (2007). The abstract selection task: New data and an almost comprehensive model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 33, 680-703.
27. Logie, R. H., & Gilhooly, K. J. (1998). (Eds.), Working memory and thinking. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
28. Markovits, H., & Schroyens, W. (2007). A curious belief-bias effect. Experimental Psychology, 54, 38-43.
29. Morley, N. J., Evans, J. St. B. T., & Handley, S. J. (2004). Belief bias and figural bias in syllogistic reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 666-692.
30. Newstead, S. E., Handley, S. J., Harley, C, Wright, H., & Farelly, D. (2004). Individual differences in deductive reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 33-60.
31. Newstead, S. E., Pollard, P., Evans, J. St. B. T., & Allen, J. L. (1992). The source of belief bias effects in syllogistic reasoning. Cognition, 45, 257-284.
32. Osman, M. (2004). An evaluation of dual-process theories of reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 988-1010.
33. Roberts, M. J., & Newton, E. J. (2001). Inspection times, the change task, and the rapid-response selection task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 1031-1048.
34. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
35. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Elrbaum Associates.
36. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645-726.
37. Stevenson, R. J., & Over, D. E. (1995). Deduction from uncertain premises. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 613-643.
38. Thompson, V. A. (1994). Interpretational factors in conditional reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 22, 742-758.
39. Thompson, V. A. (1996). Reasoning from false premises: The role of soundness in making logical deductions. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50, 315-319.
40. Thompson, V. A. (2000). The task-specific nature of domain-general reasoning. Cognition, 76, 209-268.
41. Thompson, V. A., Striemer, C. L., Reikoff, R., Gunter, R. W., & Campbell, J. I. D. (2003). Syllogistic reasoning time: Discon-firmation disconfirmed. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 184-189.
42. Verschueren, N., Schaeken, W., & d'Ydewalle, G. (2005). A dual-process specification of causal conditional reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 11, 239-278.
43. Wason, P. C, & Evans, J. St. B. T. (1975). Dual processes in reasoning? Cognition, 3, 141-154.