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 Concept Videos

Self-Discrepancy Theory02:45

Self-Discrepancy Theory

One influential perspective on what motivates people's behavior is detailed in Tory Higgin's self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). He proposed that people hold disagreeing internal representations of themselves that lead to different emotional states.
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the $2,000...
Confirmation Biases01:31

Confirmation Biases

The confirmation bias is the tendency to focus on information that confirms our existing beliefs and ignore information that is inconsistent with our expectations. For example, if you think that your professor is not very nice, you notice all of the instances of rude behavior exhibited by the professor while ignoring the countless pleasant interactions he is involved in on a daily basis. Have you ever fallen prey to the confirmation bias, either as the source or target of such bias?
Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test for Matched Pairs01:09

Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test for Matched Pairs

The Wilcoxon signed-rank test for matched pairs evaluates the null hypothesis by combining the ranks of differences with their signs. It essentially tests whether the median of the differences in a population of matched pairs is zero. Since the test incorporates more information than the sign test, it generally yields more trustable conclusions. This test also does not require the data to follow a normal distribution, but two conditions must be met for it to be applicable: (1) the data must...
Correspondence Bias01:17

Correspondence Bias

Correspondence bias, also referred to as the fundamental attribution error, describes the tendency to attribute another person’s behavior to internal characteristics rather than situational influences. This cognitive bias leads individuals to overlook external factors that may be influencing actions, thereby fostering potentially inaccurate assessments of others’ intentions and dispositions.Empirical Evidence for Correspondence BiasResearch has consistently demonstrated the prevalence of...
Causes of Similarity-Dissimilarity Effect01:26

Causes of Similarity-Dissimilarity Effect

The similarity-dissimilarity effect, a fundamental concept in social psychology, explains how interpersonal similarities and differences influence attraction and social interactions. This effect is supported by three key psychological perspectives: balance theory, social comparison theory, and consensual validation.Balance Theory and Cognitive ConsistencyBalance theory, developed by Fritz Heider, posits that individuals seek cognitive consistency in their relationships. When two people share...

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

A Survey on Transit Map Layout - from Design, Machine, and Human Perspectives.

Computer graphics forum : journal of the European Association for Computer Graphics·2020
Same author

Deductive reasoning in children with specific language impairment.

The British journal of developmental psychology·2010
Same author

Explaining inappropriate strategy selection in a simple reasoning task.

British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)·2007
Same author

Expanding the universe of categorical syllogisms: a challenge for reasoning researchers.

Behavior research methods·2006
Same author

Categorical reasoning from multiple diagrams.

The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology·2005
Same author

Belief bias and relational reasoning.

The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology·2003

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 26, 2026

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

The elusive matching bias effect in the disjunctive selection task.

Maxwell J Roberts1

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, UK. mjr@essex.ac.uk

Experimental Psychology
|June 11, 2002
PubMed
Summary

People exhibit matching bias when solving logic puzzles, selecting rule-matching options regardless of correctness. This study found bias varies with rule type, challenging its general explanation in cognitive reasoning.

More Related Videos

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice
08:35

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice

Published on: January 22, 2016

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 26, 2026

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues
07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice
08:35

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice

Published on: January 22, 2016

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Logic and Reasoning
  • Human Decision-Making

Background:

  • Conditional reasoning tasks, like the Wason selection task, often reveal a 'matching bias' where participants select options matching terms in the rule.
  • This bias has been hypothesized to stem from general cognitive mechanisms applicable across various logical rule types.
  • Previous research primarily focused on conditional rules, leaving the universality of matching bias unexplored for other rule structures.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the generality of matching bias by examining performance on selection tasks involving categorical and disjunctive rules.
  • To test whether the explanations for matching bias in conditional reasoning apply to other logical structures.
  • To explore the relationship between performance on different types of reasoning tasks and evaluate cognitive capacity accounts.

Main Methods:

  • Participants completed Wason-style selection tasks using conditional, categorical, and disjunctive rules.
  • Performance was analyzed to identify patterns of bias in option selection for each rule type.
  • Correlations between performance across different task types were calculated to assess cognitive capacity explanations.

Main Results:

  • A clear matching bias was observed for categorical rules, consistent with findings for conditional rules.
  • An 'inverted matching bias' was identified for disjunctive rules, where participants selected options that did not match the rule terms.
  • Performance on categorical and disjunctive rule tasks was not significantly correlated, and performance on conditional tasks was also uncorrelated with the other two.

Conclusions:

  • The findings challenge the proposed generality of matching bias and its underlying explanations, as the phenomenon differs across rule types.
  • The lack of correlation between performance on different reasoning tasks suggests that cognitive capacity may not be the sole determinant of selection task performance.
  • Further research is needed to understand the specific cognitive processes underlying performance variations in logical reasoning tasks.