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.

L J Rips1

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Chicago, Illinois 60637.

Annual Review of Psychology
|January 1, 1990
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Strict theories excel at rule-based reasoning but falter with complex inferences. Loose theories offer a more robust, continuous approach, yet struggle with generalization and justification, highlighting limitations in current reasoning models.

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

Two kinds of reasoning.

Psychological science·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 journal

Implicit Bias: Evolution of a Powerful Idea.

Annual review of psychology·2026
Same journal

Introduction.

Annual review of psychology·2026
Same journal

Social Robotics Is Not (Just) About Machines, It Is About People: Psychology's Role in Developing Social Machines.

Annual review of psychology·2025
Same journal

Intensive Longitudinal Methods: Toward a Psychological Science of Daily Life.

Annual review of psychology·2025
Same journal

Human Rationality.

Annual review of psychology·2025
Same journal

Space to Act, Think, and Create.

Annual review of psychology·2025
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Science
  • Philosophy of Mind
  • Psychology of Reasoning

Background:

  • Formal reasoning theories, known as Strict theories, emphasize rules and structure, proving effective for deductively valid arguments.
  • However, Strict theories often require external factors to explain reasoning failures and are less adept at handling inductive or analogical reasoning.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the strengths and weaknesses of Strict and Loose theories of reasoning.
  • To explore the applicability of these models to various types of arguments and reasoning challenges.

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis and comparison of theoretical frameworks for reasoning.
  • Examination of how Strict and Loose theories account for deductive, inductive, and analogical reasoning phenomena.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Strict theories provide a clear account of rule-based inference but struggle with complex or 'unruly' problems, requiring non-reasoning explanations for breakdowns.
  • Loose theories, using continuous functions, are more robust across argument types but face challenges in belief generation, justification, and distinguishing correlation from causation.

Conclusions:

  • Neither Strict nor Loose theories appear exclusively true; they represent distinct theoretical postures rather than complete scientific theories.
  • Integrating insights from both Strict and Loose approaches presents significant challenges, suggesting a need for novel theoretical developments in understanding human reasoning.