Experts and laymen grossly underestimate the benefits of argumentation for reasoning

Thinking and Reasoning

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 341-355

  Mercier, Hugo ^a   Trouche, Emmanuel ^b   Yama, Hiroshi ^c   Heintz, Christophe ^d   Girotto, Vittorio ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEUCHÂTEL   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^c Osaka Prefecture University   (Japan)

^d CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

^e UNIVERSITY IUAV OF VENICE   (Italy)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Group problem solving; Intuitions about argumentation; Reasoning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84929277555     PISSN: 13546783     EISSN: 14640708     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13546783.2014.981582     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Barrows, S. (1981). Distorting mirrors: Visions of the crowd in late nineteenth-century France. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
2. Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Blinder, A. S., & Morgan, J. (2005). Are two heads better than one? Monetary policy by committee. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 37, 789–812.
4. Bos, M. C. (1937). Experimental study of productive collaboration. Acta Psychologica, 3, 315–426.
5. Cattaneo, C. (1864). Dell’antitesi come metodo di psicologia sociale [On the antithesis as method of social psychology]. Il Politecnico, 20, 262–270.
6. Descartes, R. (1985). The philosophical writings of Descartes (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
8. Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365–395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
10. Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. Guzzo, R. A., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 307–338.
12. Heine, S. J., Kitayama, S., Lehman, D. R., Takata, T., Ide, E., Leung, C., & Matsumoto, H. (2001). Divergent consequences of success and failure in Japan and North America: An investigation of self-improving motivations and malleable selves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 599–615.
13. Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink (2nd Rev. ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
14. Joubert, G. J. (1932). Indiwiduele en kollektiewe Prestasie: ’N byjdrae tot die experimentele groepspsigologie [Individual and collective performance: A contribution to experimental group-psychology]. Amsterdam: Swets en Zeitlinger.
15. Landemore, H. (2012). Democratic reason: Politics, collective intelligence, and the rule of the many. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Larrick, R. P., & Soll, J. B. (2006). Intuitions about combining opinions: Misappreciation of the averaging principle. Management Science, 52, 111–127.
17. Laughlin, P. R., Bonner, B., & Miner, A. G. (2002). Groups perform better than the best individuals on letters-to-numbers problems. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 605–620.
18. Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177–189.
19. Le Bon, G. (1897). The crowd: A study of the popular mind. London: Macmillan.
20. Lombardelli, C., Proudman, J., & Talbot, J. (2005). Committees versus individuals: An experimental analysis of monetary policy decision-making. International Journal of Central Banking, 1, 181–205.
21. Maciejovsky, B., & Budescu, D. V. (2007). Collective induction without cooperation? Learning and knowledge transfer in cooperative groups and competitive auctions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 854–870.
22. Manktelow, K. (2012). Thinking and reasoning: An introduction to the psychology of reason, judgment and decision making. Hove: Psychology Press.
23. Mellers, B., Ungar, L., Baron, J., Ramos, J., Gurcay, B., Fincher, K., … Tetlock, P. E. (2014). Psychological strategies for winning a geopolitical forecasting tournament. Psychological Science, 25, 1106–1115.
24. Mercier, H. (2011a). On the universality of argumentative reasoning. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 11, 85–113.
25. Mercier, H. (2011b). Reasoning serves argumentation in children. Cognitive Development, 26, 177–191.
26. Mercier, H., Deguchi, M., Van der Henst, J.-B., & Yama, H. (2014). The benefits of argumentation are cross-culturally robust: The case of Japan. Manuscript submitted for publication.
27. Mercier, H., & Heintz, C. (2014). Scientists’ argumentative reasoning. Topoi, 33, 513–524.
28. Mercier, H., & Landemore, H. (2012). Reasoning is for arguing: Understanding the successes and failures of deliberation. Political Psychology, 33, 243–258.
29. Michaelsen, L. K., Watson, W. E., & Black, R. H. (1989). A realistic test of individual versus group consensus decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 834–839.
30. Minson, J. A., Liberman, V., & Ross, L. (2011). Two to tango. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1325–1338.
31. Moscovici, S. (1985). The age of the crowd: A historical treatise on mass psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Moshman, D., & Geil, M. (1998). Collaborative reasoning: Evidence for collective rationality. Thinking & Reasoning, 4, 231–248.
33. Okada, T., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Collaboration discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21, 109–146.
34. Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (1980). Social interaction and cognitive development in children. London: Academic Press.
35. Rattan, A., Savani, K., Naidu, N. V. R., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Can everyone become highly intelligent? Cultural differences in and societal consequences of beliefs about the universal potential for intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 787–803.
36. Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (1996). The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques. International Journal of Forecasting, 12, 73–89.
37. Shaw, M. E. (1932). A comparison of individuals and small groups in the rational solution of complex problems. The American Journal of Psychology, 44, 491–504.
38. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (Vol. 2). London: Allyn & Bacon.
39. Smith, M., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323, 122–124.
40. Sniezek, J. A., & Henry, R. A. (1989). Accuracy and confidence in group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 1–28.
41. Soll, J. B., & Larrick, R. P. (2009). Strategies for revising judgment: How (and how well) people use others’ opinions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 780–805.
42. Sunstein, C. R. (2002). The law of group polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy, 10, 175–195.
43. Trouche, E., Sander, E., & Mercier, H. (in press). Arguments, more than confidence, explain the good performance of reasoning groups. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
44. Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology: I (pp. 106–137). Harmondsworth: Penguin.