Reasoning and Decision Making: - Five General Strategies - Reasoning and Logic - Two Hypotheses

Reasoning and Decision Making
Five general strategies

Reasoning and Logic
Two hypotheses
inherently logical
logic must be learned
Cognitive - reasoning.ppt 2001 Laura Snodgr
Reasoning and Decision Making

Evidence
categorical syllogisms
sources of error
conditional reasoning
sources of error
Bounded rationality
Five General Strategies

Prototype matching
is an instance a member of a category
Representativeness heuristic
intuitive predictions
stereotypes
e.g. Is the man, with the glasses and tweed jacket who is reading a book at
the lunch table, a truck driver or a college professor?
base rate probabilities
Simulation heuristic
imagine a mental model
Five General Strategies

Reasoning by analogy
similarity to past experiences or problems
problem of distinguishing valid from invalid analogies
Availability heuristic
frequency versus vividness of examples
examplar search
look for counter examples
how easily does an example come to mind
Reasoning and Logic

Reasoning
the thinking involved in determining whether one proposition logically follows
from another
attempts to determine the validity of an argument or idea
Formal Logic
specify rules of inference that yield valid arguments
validity is independent of content (truth value)
how we ought to reason
How do we actually reason?

Do the rules of formal logic describe actual behavior or do they require
careful training?
Two Hypotheses
Information processing stages of reasoning
Stage one - encode a representation in working memory
Stage two - retrieve set of rules to check logic
Humans are inherently logical

LTM contains a set of rules of inference equal to formal logic
when people make errors it is because:
encode problem incorrectly
fail to use inference rules and respond on some other basis
Humans are not inherently logical

LTM has no logic rules unless formally trained
Two Hypotheses
Evaluate the hypotheses based on evidence from two
types of reasoning
categorical syllogisms
e.g. All M are P
All S are M
therefore All S are P
conditional reasoning
e.g. If P, then Q
P
therefore Q
Categorical Syllogisms
Consist of a major and minor proposition (premise)
followed by a conclusion
A valid syllogism is one in which the conclusion
necessarily follows logically from the premises
There are four possible figures
M-P
P-M
M-P
P-M
S-M
S-M
M-S
M-S
S-P
S-P
S-P
S-P
Categorical Syllogisms
There are four possible moods
affirmative-universal
negative-universal
affirmative-particular
negative-particular
e.g. All S are P

e.g. No S are P
e.g. Some S are P
e.g. Some S are not P
There are a total of 256 possible configurations

only 24 of these are valid !
Sources of Error in Categorical Syllogisms

Atmosphere effect
respond to the mood of the premises
whenever at least one premise is negative (particular) then the conclusion
chosen tends to be negative (particular)
irrational - not use logic rules just maintain mood (heuristic)
generally true for the valid but can lead to invalid results
Content
especially with emotionally laden premises and conclusions
based on believability of conclusion
use biases and prior belief
All scientists are honest
All women are scientists
therefore: All women are honest
10

Failure to accept the logical task
logic is theoretical NOT empirical
must ignore the truth value of each premise
error in encoding the nature of the problem
subjects evaluate the truth not the logic
e.g. Kpelle rice farmers
e.g. children
evidence that education may teach us when to reason
Failure to discriminate information given in the premise

from information retrieved from LTM
unintentionally supplement
e.g. when premise is Some men are honest; add but not all
11

Incorrect conversion of premises
assumptions of symmetry
e.g. All A are B does not mean All B are A
real world examples help block incorrect conversions
e.g. All dogs are animals is not converted to All animals are dogs
real world examples may be biased by beliefs e.g. All republicans are rich
may convert to All rich people are republicans if you believe this
Forgetting premises
three types of common recall errors
omit a premise
displace terms from one premise to next
change quantifiers (some to all)
12
Conditional Reasoning
Two parts
statement of the condition rule
if the first proposition is true then the second is true
statement of the truth value of one of the propositions
e.g.
If the world was flat, then you could fall off the edge
You fell of the edge
Therefore ?
13
Conditional Reasoning
Form
If p, then q
p
therefore q
Name
Example
modus ponens
(valid)
If the objects is square, then it is blue

The object is square
The object is blue
If p, then q
modus tollendo
Not q
tollens (valid)
Therefore not p

The object is not blue
The object is not square
If p, then q
denying the
Not p
antecedent
Therefore not q (invalid)

If p, then q
Q
Therefore p

The object is blue
The object is square
affirming the
consequent
(invalid)
14
Sources of Errors in Conditional Reasoning

Negatives
people have trouble tracing the implications of negation
make more errors when a not is present
modus tollens and denying the antecedent
Confirmation bias
bias to seek answers (evidence ) that confirms supports rather than denies
problem in scientific hypothesis testing
stereotypes and prejudice
e.g. given 2, 4, 6, 8
generate sequences and guess the rule
15
Sources of Errors in Conditional Reasoning

Confirmation bias continued
whenever we have an hypothesis (belief, prejudice) we seek confirmations
not disconfirmations
one piece of disconfirmatory evidence is much more informative than several
confirmatory pieces of evidence
problem: scientists have a confirmatory bias which interferes with progress
16
Bounded Rationality
Human may be inherently capable of logic
However
use heuristics
not always accept logical task
processing and memory errors
problems with negatives
cruising or mindlessness not use our capacity
17

Reasoning and Decision Making: - Five General Strategies - Reasoning and Logic - Two Hypotheses

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Reasoning and Decision Making: - Five General Strategies - Reasoning and Logic - Two Hypotheses

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Reasoning and Decision Making

Five general strategies

Cognitive - reasoning.ppt 2001 Laura Snodgr