Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Two kinds of reasoning.

L J Rips1

  • 1Psychology Department, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Rd., Evanston, IL 60208, USA. rips@northwestern.edu

Psychological Science
|May 9, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

People evaluate arguments using distinct cognitive processes for deductive correctness and inductive strength, not a single continuum. This research clarifies human reasoning and argument evaluation methods.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Necessity and natural categories.

Psychological bulletin·2001
Same author

A year's memories: the calendar effect in autobiographical recall.

Memory & cognition·1998
Same author

Similarity as an explanatory construct.

Cognition·1998
Same author

Categories and resemblance.

Journal of experimental psychology. General·1993
Same author

Parts of activities: reply to Fellbaum and Miller (1990).

Psychological review·1990
Same author

Paralogical reasoning: Evans, Johnson-Laird, and Byrne on liar and truth-teller puzzles.

Cognition·1990

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Philosophy of Mind

Background:

  • Human reasoning can be assessed via deductive correctness or inductive strength.
  • Alternative theories propose a single psychological continuum for evaluating arguments.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To test competing theories of argument evaluation.
  • To investigate whether people use distinct or unified cognitive processes for assessing arguments.

Main Methods:

  • Participants evaluated the same arguments for both deductive correctness and inductive strength.
  • Experimental design manipulated instructions to elicit different evaluation types.

Main Results:

  • An interaction was observed between argument type and evaluation instructions.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Participants differentiated between deductive correctness and inductive strength judgments.

    • Conclusions:

    • Findings support the dual-process view of argument evaluation.
    • Human cognitive processes for reasoning are distinct, not monolithic.