Robert Ricco | California State University, San Bernardino (original) (raw)
Papers by Robert Ricco
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Base rate reasoning as assessed on Base rate neglect (BRN) Tasks has been studied extensively, wi... more Base rate reasoning as assessed on Base rate neglect (BRN) Tasks has been studied extensively, with a sizable body of findings indicating that both logical (base rate) and belief-based (case description) processing contribute to responses on the task. Various task conditions have been found to influence which type of processing controls responding. The present study compares two instructional sets, one which requires responding in terms of the base rate information and one which requires responding in accordance with the case description. This manipulation allows for a distinction between explicit processing (set-consistent) and implicit processing (set-inconsistent and potentially interfering). We also manipulated the extremity of the base rates employed in the task and the extremity of the stereotypes contained in the case description. We argue that extremity effects should be present in implicit, but not explicit, processing, suggesting that these effects are the result of limita...
Advancing Developmental Science, 2017
E ven a cursory review of the deductive reasoning literature reveals some striking inconsistencie... more E ven a cursory review of the deductive reasoning literature reveals some striking inconsistencies both within the developmental fi ndings, and between those fi ndings and the results of adult research (
College student journal, 2020
Thinking & Reasoning, 2020
An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., ... more An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., modus ponens-MP) and more complex (e.g., modus tollens-MT) forms of conditional inference result from intuitive, type 1 processes. The present study considers whether a proclivity, ability, or capacity to engage in analytical (type 2) thinking might be more closely related to performance on MT than to performance on MP. Such a finding would suggest that the extent to which MT is intuitive for an individual is a function of analytical thinking level and that, in general, MT is not as intuitive an inference form as MP. The present study tested this prediction by way of a conditional reasoning task on which instructional set (belief or logic), congruency, and complexity of inference were manipulated. While results varied somewhat across experiments, it was generally the case that differences in performance between low and high levels of analytical thinking proclivity (AOT), ability (CRT), and capacity (Working Memory Span) were greater for MT problems than for MP problems suggesting that these inference forms may not be equally intuitive.
Argumentation and Advocacy, 2002
Journal of Counseling & Development, 2017
Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are... more Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are predictive of the ways in which individuals approach, interpret, and behave during disagreements. For example, individuals with a view of argument as beneficial are more open to the possibility that partners in a disagreement may be making progress in resolving their differences (Ricco & Sierra, 2011) and are less likely to personalize conflicts or to be anxious about communicating with others (Hample, 2005; Infante & Rancer, 1982; Schrodt & Wheeless, 2001). Similarly, individuals espousing positive views of argument seem to be more adaptive and flexible in communicative settings (Martin, Anderson, & Thweatt, 1998) and are more likely to believe that successful relationships result from the mutual efforts of both partners rather than from destiny or luck (Knee, Patrick, & Lonsbary, 2003). In addition, relationship partners who view recurring arguments as potentially resolvable report more relationship satisfaction and greater individual wellbeing (Bevan & Sparks, 2014; Johnson & Roloff, 1998; Malis & Roloff, 2006). Collectively, these findings suggest that the capacity to view argument as a potentially beneficial interaction is likely to support more enduring and mutually satisfying interpersonal relationships. By contrast, a view of argument as threatening and nonbeneficial would seem to represent a significant obstacle to the prospects of relationship growth and satisfaction. The origins of individuals' lay beliefs about argument are complex and include societal, cultural, and family value systems as well as personality traits or dispositions.
Developmental Review, Sep 1, 2011
WIREs Cognitive Science, 2010
Dual-system, dual-process, accounts of adult cognitive processing are examined in the context of ... more Dual-system, dual-process, accounts of adult cognitive processing are examined in the context of a self-organizing relational developmental systems approaches to cognitive growth. Contemporary adult dual-process accounts describe a linear architecture of mind entailing two split-off, but interacting systems; a domain general, content-free 'analytic' system (system 2) and a domain specific highly contextualized 'heuristic' system (system 1). In the developmental literature on deductive reasoning, a similar distinction has been made between a domain general competence (reflective, algorithmic) system and a domain specific procedural system. In contrast to the linear accounts offered by empiricist, nativist, and/or evolutionary explanations, the dual competence-procedural developmental perspective argues that the mature systems emerge through developmental transformations as differentiations and intercoordinations of an early relatively undifferentiated action matrix. This development, whose microscopic mechanism is action-in-the-world, is characterized as being embodied, nonlinear, and epigenetic.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2008
The present study explored the extent to which lay adults consider aspects of argument structure ... more The present study explored the extent to which lay adults consider aspects of argument structure in judging the strength and function of informal arguments and in constructing arguments to meet specific adequacy goals. Across two experiments, college students were presented with base (one-premise) arguments, which were then expanded into convergent, coordinate, and subordinate arguments closely matched in terms of content, believability, and strength. Coordinate arguments were associated with the greatest gains in argument strength via their construction and the greatest loss in strength when one of their premises was falsified. To some degree, the argument types were also judged to perform different functions and to serve different goals. The construction of convergent arguments was associated with building independent lines of support while the construction of subordinate arguments was associated with providing justification for premises. Expansion into a coordinate argument was s...
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1997
In attempting to solve a problem in the fewest possible moves, one must determine moves that are ... more In attempting to solve a problem in the fewest possible moves, one must determine moves that are individually necessary and jointly sufficient. This amounts to constructing a demonstration or proof of the solution. The development of proof construction was explored through two problems-a hidden figure task and a variant of the game "Mastermind" (J. Piaget (1987). Possibility and necessity: Vol. 2. The role of necessity in cognitive development. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press). In Experiment 1, children 11 to 12 years of age distinguished necessary from nonnecessary moves and recognized when sufficient evidence had been established to determine a solution to a greater extent than children 7 to 8 years of age. In a second experiment, the original hidden-figure task was modified with the aim of reducing its information-processing demands. The performance of 8- to 9-year-olds on the modified problems was comparable to, and in certain respects surpassed, the performance of the oldest children on the original problem in Experiment 1. Seven-year-olds did not perform well on the modified problems even with training. Results are discussed in terms of theory and research on children's understanding of necessity and sufficiency.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1995
Inductive and deductive approaches to the construction of problem-solving proofs were examined us... more Inductive and deductive approaches to the construction of problem-solving proofs were examined using a task that requires the discovery of a geometrical figure hidden behind a series of covers. It was proposed that during adolescence, with the acquisition of a formal reasoning competence (as measured by Overton's [1990] version of Wason's selection task), there would be a transition from inductive to deductive proof construction strategies. One hundred adolescents were assessed on both the problem-solving proof task and the reasoning competence is associated with taking a deductive approach to proof construction. Formal reasoners tend to construct a proof based on the use of a falsification strategy as demonstrated by their search for disconfirming instances. A nonformal level of competence on the other hand is associated with inductive approaches. In this situation nonformal subjects tend to employ a verification strategy as demonstrated by the generation of redundant information. Results support the hypothesis that there is a cognitive developmental progression from an inductive approach to the construction of proofs to a deductive approach.
Developmental Review, 2011
Many current psychological models of reasoning minimize the role of deductive processes in human ... more Many current psychological models of reasoning minimize the role of deductive processes in human thought. In the present paper, we argue that deduction is an important part of ordinary cognition and we propose that a dual systems Competence-? Procedural processing model conceptualized within relational developmental systems theory offers the most coherent and productive framework for integrating and explaining the sometimes conflicting findings on the development of deductive reasoning across the lifespan. This model invokes a distinction that is quite similar to, though not identical with, the system 2-system 1 dichotomy employed in other dual systems models. In addition, the Competence-? Procedural processing model maintains the more specific distinction between algorithmic and reflective subsystems of system 2. In this account, the algorithmic system is represented as a kind of mental logic while the reflective system is the seat of practical and epistemic self-regulation, including emergent epistemic and metalogical norms. While the proposed systems of mind often appear as splitoff component features in other dual systems models, relational developmental systems theory conceives of them as the highly complex and relationally integrated outcome of a self-organizing and self-regulating adaptive developmental process.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2007
Argumentation, 2010
The present study explored several dispositional factors associated with individual differences i... more The present study explored several dispositional factors associated with individual differences in lay adult’s interpretation of when an arguer is, or is not, committed to a statement. College students were presented with several two-person arguments in which the proponent of a thesis conceded a key point in the last turn. Participants were then asked to indicate the extent to which
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 2003
Theories of informal reasoning and critical thinking often maintain that everyday, informal argum... more Theories of informal reasoning and critical thinking often maintain that everyday, informal arguments can be classified into types based on the specific organization that the premises or reasons enter into in their support for the conclusion (Snoeck Henkemans, 2000; Vorobej, 1995b). Three general types are identified: convergent, coordinately linked, and subordinately linked arguments. There has been no empirical research, however, to determine whether these structural distinctions have any psychological reality. In the first two of four experiments, college students were presented with premise pairs from larger, informal arguments and were asked to judge the nature of the relationship between the premises in a pair. The judgments involved applying “tests” of linkage, subordination, and so on, that have been proposed in the theoretical literature on argument analysis (e.g., Walton, 1996a; Yanal, 1991). Results suggest that adults can effectively distinguish between linked (interdepe...
Journal of Counseling and Development, 2017
Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are... more Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are predictive of the ways in which individuals approach, interpret, and behave during disagreements. For example, individuals with a view of argument as beneficial are more open to the possibility that partners in a disagreement may be making progress in resolving their differences (Ricco & Sierra, 2011) and are less likely to personalize conflicts or to be anxious about communicating with others (Hample, 2005; Infante & Rancer, 1982; Schrodt & Wheeless, 2001). Similarly, individuals espousing positive views of argument seem to be more adaptive and flexible in communicative settings (Martin, Anderson, & Thweatt, 1998) and are more likely to believe that successful relationships result from the mutual efforts of both partners rather than from destiny or luck (Knee, Patrick, & Lonsbary, 2003). In addition, relationship partners who view recurring arguments as potentially resolvable report more relationship satisfaction and greater individual wellbeing (Bevan & Sparks, 2014; Johnson & Roloff, 1998; Malis & Roloff, 2006). Collectively, these findings suggest that the capacity to view argument as a potentially beneficial interaction is likely to support more enduring and mutually satisfying interpersonal relationships. By contrast, a view of argument as threatening and nonbeneficial would seem to represent a significant obstacle to the prospects of relationship growth and satisfaction. The origins of individuals' lay beliefs about argument are complex and include societal, cultural, and family value systems as well as personality traits or dispositions.
Thinking and Reasoning, 2020
An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., ... more An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., modus ponens-MP) and more complex (e.g., modus tollens-MT) forms of conditional inference result from intuitive, type 1 processes. The present study considers whether a proclivity, ability, or capacity to engage in analytical (type 2) thinking might be more closely related to performance on MT than to performance on MP. Such a finding would suggest that the extent to which MT is intuitive for an individual is a function of analytical thinking level and that, in general, MT is not as intuitive an inference form as MP. The present study tested this prediction by way of a conditional reasoning task on which instructional set (belief or logic), congruency, and complexity of inference were manipulated. While results varied somewhat across experiments, it was generally the case that differences in performance between low and high levels of analytical thinking proclivity (AOT), ability (CRT), and capacity (Working Memory Span) were greater for MT problems than for MP problems suggesting that these inference forms may not be equally intuitive.
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2015
An arguer's position at a given point in an argument can be characterized... more An arguer's position at a given point in an argument can be characterized as a set of commitments. The present study considers the perceptions of ordinary language users about the implications of making a concession for the contents of the conceder's commitment set. In particular, we examine two sources of influence on such lay perceptions-conversational distance (i.e., the number of turns separating the concession from commitments incurred earlier in the argument) and an individual's prior beliefs regarding the content of the argument. Across two studies, college students were administered an argument task assessing the extent to which a concession by the protagonist of an argument on the last move indicated changes to other commitments incurred earlier in the argument. Results indicated that participants were more likely to judge a concession as indicating a change in prior commitments if (a) the commitment was incurred later in the argument than earlier, and (b) the participant disagreed with the protagonists' thesis in the argument. In addition, performance on deductive reasoning tasks predicted individual differences in the conversational distance effect, but not the belief bias effect.
Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, 2015
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2015
Naïve beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowingepistemic beliefsare present from childhoo... more Naïve beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowingepistemic beliefsare present from childhood onward and undergo development through a relatively fixed sequence of levels from realism through relativism to rationalism. There appears to be more than one pass through this sequence, with the first pass occurring from middle childhood through late adolescence, and the second pass occurring from late adolescence through early adulthood. The period of relativism during adolescence is characterized by generic doubt about the possibility of establishing a valid, rational basis for one's beliefs, coupled with interesting and varied ways of coping with that doubt.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Base rate reasoning as assessed on Base rate neglect (BRN) Tasks has been studied extensively, wi... more Base rate reasoning as assessed on Base rate neglect (BRN) Tasks has been studied extensively, with a sizable body of findings indicating that both logical (base rate) and belief-based (case description) processing contribute to responses on the task. Various task conditions have been found to influence which type of processing controls responding. The present study compares two instructional sets, one which requires responding in terms of the base rate information and one which requires responding in accordance with the case description. This manipulation allows for a distinction between explicit processing (set-consistent) and implicit processing (set-inconsistent and potentially interfering). We also manipulated the extremity of the base rates employed in the task and the extremity of the stereotypes contained in the case description. We argue that extremity effects should be present in implicit, but not explicit, processing, suggesting that these effects are the result of limita...
Advancing Developmental Science, 2017
E ven a cursory review of the deductive reasoning literature reveals some striking inconsistencie... more E ven a cursory review of the deductive reasoning literature reveals some striking inconsistencies both within the developmental fi ndings, and between those fi ndings and the results of adult research (
College student journal, 2020
Thinking & Reasoning, 2020
An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., ... more An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., modus ponens-MP) and more complex (e.g., modus tollens-MT) forms of conditional inference result from intuitive, type 1 processes. The present study considers whether a proclivity, ability, or capacity to engage in analytical (type 2) thinking might be more closely related to performance on MT than to performance on MP. Such a finding would suggest that the extent to which MT is intuitive for an individual is a function of analytical thinking level and that, in general, MT is not as intuitive an inference form as MP. The present study tested this prediction by way of a conditional reasoning task on which instructional set (belief or logic), congruency, and complexity of inference were manipulated. While results varied somewhat across experiments, it was generally the case that differences in performance between low and high levels of analytical thinking proclivity (AOT), ability (CRT), and capacity (Working Memory Span) were greater for MT problems than for MP problems suggesting that these inference forms may not be equally intuitive.
Argumentation and Advocacy, 2002
Journal of Counseling & Development, 2017
Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are... more Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are predictive of the ways in which individuals approach, interpret, and behave during disagreements. For example, individuals with a view of argument as beneficial are more open to the possibility that partners in a disagreement may be making progress in resolving their differences (Ricco & Sierra, 2011) and are less likely to personalize conflicts or to be anxious about communicating with others (Hample, 2005; Infante & Rancer, 1982; Schrodt & Wheeless, 2001). Similarly, individuals espousing positive views of argument seem to be more adaptive and flexible in communicative settings (Martin, Anderson, & Thweatt, 1998) and are more likely to believe that successful relationships result from the mutual efforts of both partners rather than from destiny or luck (Knee, Patrick, & Lonsbary, 2003). In addition, relationship partners who view recurring arguments as potentially resolvable report more relationship satisfaction and greater individual wellbeing (Bevan & Sparks, 2014; Johnson & Roloff, 1998; Malis & Roloff, 2006). Collectively, these findings suggest that the capacity to view argument as a potentially beneficial interaction is likely to support more enduring and mutually satisfying interpersonal relationships. By contrast, a view of argument as threatening and nonbeneficial would seem to represent a significant obstacle to the prospects of relationship growth and satisfaction. The origins of individuals' lay beliefs about argument are complex and include societal, cultural, and family value systems as well as personality traits or dispositions.
Developmental Review, Sep 1, 2011
WIREs Cognitive Science, 2010
Dual-system, dual-process, accounts of adult cognitive processing are examined in the context of ... more Dual-system, dual-process, accounts of adult cognitive processing are examined in the context of a self-organizing relational developmental systems approaches to cognitive growth. Contemporary adult dual-process accounts describe a linear architecture of mind entailing two split-off, but interacting systems; a domain general, content-free 'analytic' system (system 2) and a domain specific highly contextualized 'heuristic' system (system 1). In the developmental literature on deductive reasoning, a similar distinction has been made between a domain general competence (reflective, algorithmic) system and a domain specific procedural system. In contrast to the linear accounts offered by empiricist, nativist, and/or evolutionary explanations, the dual competence-procedural developmental perspective argues that the mature systems emerge through developmental transformations as differentiations and intercoordinations of an early relatively undifferentiated action matrix. This development, whose microscopic mechanism is action-in-the-world, is characterized as being embodied, nonlinear, and epigenetic.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2008
The present study explored the extent to which lay adults consider aspects of argument structure ... more The present study explored the extent to which lay adults consider aspects of argument structure in judging the strength and function of informal arguments and in constructing arguments to meet specific adequacy goals. Across two experiments, college students were presented with base (one-premise) arguments, which were then expanded into convergent, coordinate, and subordinate arguments closely matched in terms of content, believability, and strength. Coordinate arguments were associated with the greatest gains in argument strength via their construction and the greatest loss in strength when one of their premises was falsified. To some degree, the argument types were also judged to perform different functions and to serve different goals. The construction of convergent arguments was associated with building independent lines of support while the construction of subordinate arguments was associated with providing justification for premises. Expansion into a coordinate argument was s...
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1997
In attempting to solve a problem in the fewest possible moves, one must determine moves that are ... more In attempting to solve a problem in the fewest possible moves, one must determine moves that are individually necessary and jointly sufficient. This amounts to constructing a demonstration or proof of the solution. The development of proof construction was explored through two problems-a hidden figure task and a variant of the game "Mastermind" (J. Piaget (1987). Possibility and necessity: Vol. 2. The role of necessity in cognitive development. Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press). In Experiment 1, children 11 to 12 years of age distinguished necessary from nonnecessary moves and recognized when sufficient evidence had been established to determine a solution to a greater extent than children 7 to 8 years of age. In a second experiment, the original hidden-figure task was modified with the aim of reducing its information-processing demands. The performance of 8- to 9-year-olds on the modified problems was comparable to, and in certain respects surpassed, the performance of the oldest children on the original problem in Experiment 1. Seven-year-olds did not perform well on the modified problems even with training. Results are discussed in terms of theory and research on children's understanding of necessity and sufficiency.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1995
Inductive and deductive approaches to the construction of problem-solving proofs were examined us... more Inductive and deductive approaches to the construction of problem-solving proofs were examined using a task that requires the discovery of a geometrical figure hidden behind a series of covers. It was proposed that during adolescence, with the acquisition of a formal reasoning competence (as measured by Overton's [1990] version of Wason's selection task), there would be a transition from inductive to deductive proof construction strategies. One hundred adolescents were assessed on both the problem-solving proof task and the reasoning competence is associated with taking a deductive approach to proof construction. Formal reasoners tend to construct a proof based on the use of a falsification strategy as demonstrated by their search for disconfirming instances. A nonformal level of competence on the other hand is associated with inductive approaches. In this situation nonformal subjects tend to employ a verification strategy as demonstrated by the generation of redundant information. Results support the hypothesis that there is a cognitive developmental progression from an inductive approach to the construction of proofs to a deductive approach.
Developmental Review, 2011
Many current psychological models of reasoning minimize the role of deductive processes in human ... more Many current psychological models of reasoning minimize the role of deductive processes in human thought. In the present paper, we argue that deduction is an important part of ordinary cognition and we propose that a dual systems Competence-? Procedural processing model conceptualized within relational developmental systems theory offers the most coherent and productive framework for integrating and explaining the sometimes conflicting findings on the development of deductive reasoning across the lifespan. This model invokes a distinction that is quite similar to, though not identical with, the system 2-system 1 dichotomy employed in other dual systems models. In addition, the Competence-? Procedural processing model maintains the more specific distinction between algorithmic and reflective subsystems of system 2. In this account, the algorithmic system is represented as a kind of mental logic while the reflective system is the seat of practical and epistemic self-regulation, including emergent epistemic and metalogical norms. While the proposed systems of mind often appear as splitoff component features in other dual systems models, relational developmental systems theory conceives of them as the highly complex and relationally integrated outcome of a self-organizing and self-regulating adaptive developmental process.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2007
Argumentation, 2010
The present study explored several dispositional factors associated with individual differences i... more The present study explored several dispositional factors associated with individual differences in lay adult’s interpretation of when an arguer is, or is not, committed to a statement. College students were presented with several two-person arguments in which the proponent of a thesis conceded a key point in the last turn. Participants were then asked to indicate the extent to which
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 2003
Theories of informal reasoning and critical thinking often maintain that everyday, informal argum... more Theories of informal reasoning and critical thinking often maintain that everyday, informal arguments can be classified into types based on the specific organization that the premises or reasons enter into in their support for the conclusion (Snoeck Henkemans, 2000; Vorobej, 1995b). Three general types are identified: convergent, coordinately linked, and subordinately linked arguments. There has been no empirical research, however, to determine whether these structural distinctions have any psychological reality. In the first two of four experiments, college students were presented with premise pairs from larger, informal arguments and were asked to judge the nature of the relationship between the premises in a pair. The judgments involved applying “tests” of linkage, subordination, and so on, that have been proposed in the theoretical literature on argument analysis (e.g., Walton, 1996a; Yanal, 1991). Results suggest that adults can effectively distinguish between linked (interdepe...
Journal of Counseling and Development, 2017
Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are... more Commonsense, naive, or lay beliefs about argument and its role in interpersonal relationships are predictive of the ways in which individuals approach, interpret, and behave during disagreements. For example, individuals with a view of argument as beneficial are more open to the possibility that partners in a disagreement may be making progress in resolving their differences (Ricco & Sierra, 2011) and are less likely to personalize conflicts or to be anxious about communicating with others (Hample, 2005; Infante & Rancer, 1982; Schrodt & Wheeless, 2001). Similarly, individuals espousing positive views of argument seem to be more adaptive and flexible in communicative settings (Martin, Anderson, & Thweatt, 1998) and are more likely to believe that successful relationships result from the mutual efforts of both partners rather than from destiny or luck (Knee, Patrick, & Lonsbary, 2003). In addition, relationship partners who view recurring arguments as potentially resolvable report more relationship satisfaction and greater individual wellbeing (Bevan & Sparks, 2014; Johnson & Roloff, 1998; Malis & Roloff, 2006). Collectively, these findings suggest that the capacity to view argument as a potentially beneficial interaction is likely to support more enduring and mutually satisfying interpersonal relationships. By contrast, a view of argument as threatening and nonbeneficial would seem to represent a significant obstacle to the prospects of relationship growth and satisfaction. The origins of individuals' lay beliefs about argument are complex and include societal, cultural, and family value systems as well as personality traits or dispositions.
Thinking and Reasoning, 2020
An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., ... more An outstanding question for Hybrid dual process models of reasoning is whether both basic (e.g., modus ponens-MP) and more complex (e.g., modus tollens-MT) forms of conditional inference result from intuitive, type 1 processes. The present study considers whether a proclivity, ability, or capacity to engage in analytical (type 2) thinking might be more closely related to performance on MT than to performance on MP. Such a finding would suggest that the extent to which MT is intuitive for an individual is a function of analytical thinking level and that, in general, MT is not as intuitive an inference form as MP. The present study tested this prediction by way of a conditional reasoning task on which instructional set (belief or logic), congruency, and complexity of inference were manipulated. While results varied somewhat across experiments, it was generally the case that differences in performance between low and high levels of analytical thinking proclivity (AOT), ability (CRT), and capacity (Working Memory Span) were greater for MT problems than for MP problems suggesting that these inference forms may not be equally intuitive.
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2015
An arguer's position at a given point in an argument can be characterized... more An arguer's position at a given point in an argument can be characterized as a set of commitments. The present study considers the perceptions of ordinary language users about the implications of making a concession for the contents of the conceder's commitment set. In particular, we examine two sources of influence on such lay perceptions-conversational distance (i.e., the number of turns separating the concession from commitments incurred earlier in the argument) and an individual's prior beliefs regarding the content of the argument. Across two studies, college students were administered an argument task assessing the extent to which a concession by the protagonist of an argument on the last move indicated changes to other commitments incurred earlier in the argument. Results indicated that participants were more likely to judge a concession as indicating a change in prior commitments if (a) the commitment was incurred later in the argument than earlier, and (b) the participant disagreed with the protagonists' thesis in the argument. In addition, performance on deductive reasoning tasks predicted individual differences in the conversational distance effect, but not the belief bias effect.
Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science, 2015
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2015
Naïve beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowingepistemic beliefsare present from childhoo... more Naïve beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowingepistemic beliefsare present from childhood onward and undergo development through a relatively fixed sequence of levels from realism through relativism to rationalism. There appears to be more than one pass through this sequence, with the first pass occurring from middle childhood through late adolescence, and the second pass occurring from late adolescence through early adulthood. The period of relativism during adolescence is characterized by generic doubt about the possibility of establishing a valid, rational basis for one's beliefs, coupled with interesting and varied ways of coping with that doubt.