Hidden conflicts: Explanations make inconsistencies harder to detect

Acta Psychologica

Volumn 139, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 486-491

  Khemlani, Sangeet S ^a   Johnson Laird, P N ^b  

^a NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

^b PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Belief revision; Explanations; Inconsistency; Principle of resolution; Reasoning

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONFLICT; HUMAN; LOGIC;

CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; LOGIC;

EID: 84857134407     PISSN: 00016918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.01.010     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Amsterlaw J., Wellman H.M. Theories of mind in transition: A microgenetic study of the development of false belief understanding. Journal of Cognitive Development 2006, 7:139-172.
2. Anderson C.A., Ross L. Perseverance of social theories: The role of explanation in the persistence of discredited information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980, 39:1037-1049.
3. Byrne R.M.J. The rational imagination 2005, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Chi M., De Leeuw N., Chiu M.H., Lavancher C. Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science 1994, 18:439-477.
5. Crowley K., Siegler R.S. Explanation and generalization in young children's strategy learning. Child Development 1999, 70:304-316.
6. Cummins D.D. Naive theories and causal deduction. Memory & Cognition 1995, 23:646-658.
7. Einhorn H.J., Hogarth R.M. Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin 1986, 99:3-19.
8. Epstein W., Glenberg A.M., Bradley M.M. Coactivation and comprehension: Contribution of text variables to the illusion of knowing. Memory & Cognition 1984, 12:355-360.
9. Garnham A. Mental models as representations of discourse and text 1987, Halsted, New York, NY.
10. Glenberg A.M., Meyer M., Lindem K. Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 1987, 26:69-83.
11. Goldvarg Y., Johnson-Laird P.N. Naïve causality: A mental model theory of causal meaning and reasoning. Cognitive Science 2001, 25:565-610.
12. Graesser A.C., Bertus E.L., Magliano J.P. Inference generation during the comprehension of narrative text. Sources of coherence in reading 1995, 295-320. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. R. Lorch, E. O'Brien (Eds.).
13. Graesser A.C., McMahen C.L. Anomalous information triggers questions when adults solve quantitative problems and comprehend stories. Journal of Education and Psychology 1993, 85:136-151.
14. Graesser A.C., Singer M., Trabasso T. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review 1994, 101:371-395.
15. Harman G.H. The inference to the best explanation. Philosophical Review 1965, 74:88-95.
16. Johnson-Laird P.N. How we reason 2006, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
17. Johnson-Laird P.N., Girotto V., Legrenzi P. Reasoning from inconsistency to consistency. Psychological Review 2004, 111:640-661.
18. Keil F.C. Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology 2006, 57:225-254.
19. Khemlani S., Johnson-Laird P.N. The need to explain. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2011, 64:2276-2288.
20. Legare C.H. Exploring explanation: Explaining inconsistent information guides hypothesis-testing behavior in young children. Child Development 2012, 83:173-185.
21. Legare C.H., Gelman S.A., Wellman H.M. Inconsistency with prior knowledge triggers children's causal explanatory reasoning. Child Development 2010, 81:929-944.
22. Leslie S.J. Generics: Cognition and acquisition. Philosophical Review 2008, 117:1-47.
23. Leslie S.J., Khemlani S., Glucksberg S. Do all ducks lay eggs? The generic overgeneralization effect. Journal of Memory and Language 2011, 65:15-31.
24. Lombrozo T. The structure and function of explanations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2006, 10:464-470.
25. Lombrozo T., Carey S. Functional explanation and the function of explanation. Cognition 2006, 99:167-204.
26. Melhorn K., Taatgen N., Lebiere C., Krems J. Memory activation and the availability of explanations in sequential diagnostic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2011, 37:1391-1411.
27. Murphy G.L., Medin D.L. The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 1985, 92:289-316.
28. Paolacci G., Chandler J., Ipeirotis P.G. Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making 2010, 5:411-419.
29. Patalano A.L., Chin-Parker S., Ross B.H. The importance of being coherent: Category coherence, cross-classification, and reasoning. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 54:407-424.
30. Rittle-Johnson B. Promoting transfer: The effects of direct instruction and self-explanation. Child Development 2006, 77:1-15.
31. Ross L., Lepper M.R., Strack F., Steinmetz J. Social explanation and social expectation: Effects of real and hypothetical explanations on subjective likelihood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1977, 35:817-829.
32. Shafto P., Coley J.D. Development of categorization and reasoning in the natural world: Novices to experts, naïve similarity to ecological knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2003, 29:641-649.
33. Sloman S.A. Causal models: How we think about the world and its alternatives 2005, Oxford UP, New York.
34. Walsh C., Johnson-Laird P.N. Changing your mind. Memory & Cognition 2009, 37:624-631.
35. Wellman H.M., Hickling A.K., Schult C.A. Young children's psychological, physical, and biological explanations. New Directions for Child Development 1997, 75:7-25.