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

Reasoning with conditionals: does every counterexample count? It's frequency that counts.

Sonja M Geiger1, Klaus Oberauer

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany. geiger@cyllene.uwa.edu.au

Memory & Cognition
|February 13, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

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

Reliability, bias, and computational cost of estimating the Bayes factor using bridge sampling and the Savage-Dickey density ratio.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

The role of eye movements and covert shifts of attention in working and long-term memory retrieval.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2026
Same author

How is free time used in complex span tasks?

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same author

Does the benefit of time for working memory arise at encoding or retrieval?

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2026
Same author

Revisiting the retro-cue benefit: Why does focusing attention result in improved memory performance?

Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance·2026
Same author

Forget For Now, but Remember Later: Can People Selectively Remove Information From Working Memory While Keeping it in Long-Term Memory?

Journal of cognition·2026
Same journal

Limited protective effects of multilingualism against age-related cognitive decline.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Validation of illustrated texts: Can pictures raise awareness of inconsistencies?

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

4I remember (and forget) your happy smiling face: Directed forgetting of emotionally expressive faces of in-group and out-group members.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Identity in the spotlight: Matching faces without overlapping features.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Test delay and change awareness moderate retroactive and proactive memory effects.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

The Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) illusion in short-term memory: Opposite effects of retention interval on true and false recognition.

Memory & cognition·2026
See all related articles

People's belief in conditional statements and their inferences depend on the frequency of exceptions, not the number of disabling conditions. This finding holds for both arbitrary and everyday conditional rules.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Reasoning
  • Decision Making

Background:

  • Understanding conditional reasoning is crucial for decision-making.
  • Previous research indicated disabling conditions influence belief in conditionals.
  • The role of exception frequency was less understood.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate factors influencing belief in conditional statements.
  • To contrast the impact of exception frequency versus disabling conditions.
  • To determine how people estimate subjective conditional probability.

Main Methods:

  • Four experiments were conducted using conditionals with arbitrary and everyday content.
  • Participants were presented with information on exception frequency and/or disabling conditions.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Belief in conditionals and inference acceptance were measured.

    • Main Results:

    • Frequency of exceptions strongly influenced belief and inference, while disabling conditions did not (Experiments 1 & 2).
    • Disabling conditions affected belief when frequency information was absent (Experiment 3).
    • Results were consistent across arbitrary and everyday conditionals (Experiment 4).

    Conclusions:

    • Belief in conditionals and inference confidence are primarily driven by the subjective conditional probability.
    • This probability is estimated based on the relative frequency of exceptions.
    • The cause of exceptions is less important than their overall frequency.