有关条件推理认知机制的概率理论

条件推理主要有两种研究范式：演绎形式(MP、DA、AC、MT)和变通形式(四卡问题)。已往研究主要探讨了内容因素、情境因素以及元认知因素等对条件推理的影响,形成了若干理论模型和观点。近来、Oaksford等人研究了概率因素对条件推理的影响．提出了条件概率模型。本文对这种新的研究取向作了详细的介绍和评价,并对未来研究进行了展望。     

有关条件推理中概率效应的实验研究

通过预备实验选取了四种不同条件概率的条件规则和四种不同前后件概率组合的条件规则作为实验材料,以大学生为被试,考察了两种概率因素(条件概率和前后件概率)对条件推理的演绎形式(MP、DA、AC、MT)以及变通形式(四卡问题)的影响。结果表明,两种概率因素对四种条件推理的影响都非常显著,研究进一步证实了人们对四种推理的认可程度主要与范畴前提的概率成正比的结论;但概率因素对四卡问题的解决影响不明显。     

Braine心理逻辑理论述评

该文对Braine提出的在推理心理学研究领域占居重要地位的“心理逻辑理论”做了综合述评。“心理逻辑理论”主要包括三方面内容:构成“心理逻辑理论”基础的一组推理规则图式、将推理规则图式应用于推理过程的推理方案、实际应用意义。Braine认为他和他的同事于1984年设计并实施的以“自然推理系统”所含各推理规则为实验材料的实验结果支持该理论的基本观点。     

中外两种主要推理模型的实验再比较研究

本研究采用2X2两因素(自变量分别为“心理模型数量”和不同“内容性质”)重复测量拉丁方实验方法,在范畴三段论推理题的内在结构为“形式正确”,且“推理者已经掌握相应的形式逻辑推理规则”的前提条件下,对西方学者提出的“心理模型”与中国学者提出的“推理题和推理者的推理知识双重结构模型”这两种理论模型再次进行了实验比较研究。结果表明,对于“正确形式—正确内容”和“正确形式—错误内容”两种不同结构的推理题,若按照形式逻辑规则来判定推理者“对各推理题的结论能否从两个前提中推论出来的推论结果”是否正确,则有:(1)当推理题含有错误内容的情况下,即使该推理题只是由“一个心理模型”所构成,也会使推理者降低对其结论判定为“正确”的可能性;(2)当推理题是由正确内容所构成时,即使该推理题是由三个心理模型所构成,对其结论判定为“正确”的可能性也要比“单模型——错误内容”构成的推理题的可能性更高。由此得到的比较结论是:在本实验条件下,“推理题和推理者的推理知识双重结构模型”对实验结果所做的解释要比“心理模型”理论所做的解释更为贴切。     

材料情绪性对条件推理影响的眼动研究

以大学生为被试,采用不同情绪效价的条件命题作为实验材料,运用眼动仪器记录被试进行条件推理的过程和结果,探讨了材料情绪性对条件推理的影响状况.实验采用3(材料情绪性:正性情绪、负性情绪、中性情绪)×4(推理形式:MP、DA、AC、MT)的重复测量实验设计.研究结果发现,正性和负性情绪材料的条件推理成绩显著地低于中性情绪材料,结果支持抑制假说.     

演绎推理是基于规则还是模型?——来自空间推理的证据

对空间推理的研究有助于探明其加工机制以及验证心理逻辑理论和心理模型理论。行为研究通过考察多种影响空间推理的因素(如心理模型数量、前提的对象顺序等)证实了心理模型理论的预测。脑成像的研究表明,空间推理活动主要激活枕-顶-额脑区网络,顶区可能是推理的特异性脑区。研究的结果同样支持心理模型理论。未来的研究应该整合演绎推理的不同理论,加强对不同演绎推理任务的研究,并将脑成像技术与EEG或ERP结合起来,进一步探明人类空间推理的机制。     

条件推理的语义关系表达形式效应

作者用以大学生为被试的实验考察, 基本条件句语义关系表达形式(充分关系、必要关系和析取关系表达形式)和作为心理模型外显建构的可能性判断任务对条件推理的可能影响。实验结果发现, 条件推理的语义关系表达形式效应显著, 条件句语义关系表达形式对被试条件推理有显著的影响, 条件推理成绩随条件句语义关系表达的外显程度增加而增加; 被试在可能性判断任务中对条件句所含心理模型的外显建构并没有明显改善条件推理的成绩; 在有可能性判断任务条件下, 被试外显心理模型建构的成绩变化模式并不能一致地预测条件推理成绩的变化模式。这些结果说明, 人们的条件推理可能并不是完全基于心理模型建构, 而是还受对条件句前后件之间语义关系理解的影响; 条件句表达形式中语义关系的外显内隐模式影响对条件句语义关系的知觉理解难易, 从而影响相应条件推理的成绩。     

说明文阅读中因果推理的意识性

采用独立记得-知道范式(IRK)和加工分离范式(PDP)探讨说明文阅读中因果推理的意识性。根据关系部分的描述与目标句是否存在逻辑冲突,创设推理成功和推理失败两种实验条件。实验1和2分别使用独立记得-知道范式和加工分离范式进行研究。两个实验的结果都发现推理成功和推理失败在有意识和无意识加工指标上都差异显著,表明说明文阅读中因果推理既影响有意识加工也影响无意识加工,该结果支持和完善了文本阅读双加工理论。     

条件推理:“演绎”与“概率”两种实验研究范式之比较

本研究通过推理心理学研究中的“演绎”和“概率”两种实验范式设计对同一个班级的大学生参与者(实验一中N=57,实验二中N=43)进行先后两次有关条件推理的实验研究后,得出如下主要结果:(1)推理者在对不同的“纯形式条件命题本身的认可度”以及对由它们各自建构的同类型推理题的推理结果之间的作答反应模式之间的差异都很小且具有较高的一致性;(2)对由不同的“含具体内容的假言命题”本身的认可度之间以及由它们建构的同类型条件推理题的推理结果之间具有较大的差异性;(3)推理者对“演绎”和“概率”两种不同实验范式分别建构的内容近似的推进题进行推理时具有大致相同的作答反应趋势。由此可以推论推理者在“概率推理实验范式”中的作答或推理结果可以被视为只是对“演绎推理实验范式”的相应推理题给出“概率解”的心理加工过程。     

内容和形式对毒品成瘾者条件推理的影响

本研究通过比较推理内容与推理形式对毒品成瘾者推理成绩的影响,以探究影响毒品成瘾者能力成绩的主要内在机制。实验采用了2(四卡片形式vs选择项形式)×2(描述性规则vs社会契约规则)混合设计,以240名男性戒毒人员为研究对象,考察他们在不同推理内容与不同推理形式下的条件推理作业成绩。结果发现:(1)就规则内容来看,描述性规则内容在选择项形式上的得分好于四卡片形式,社会契约规则内容在两种呈现形式下的成绩没有显著差异;(2)就规则呈现形式来看,四卡片形式下的描述性规则得分显著地低于社会契约规则得分; 选择项形式下两类规则内容得分无显著差异。结果表明:毒品成瘾者的条件推理行为既受到推理内容的影响,也受到逻辑规则呈现形式的影响。     

Processing of logically valid and logically invalid conditional inferences in discourse comprehension

Two competing theories of processing of conditionals (if-then) were tested. Syntactic theories posit that people only draw inferences conforming to the logically valid modus ponens (MP) schema. Mental models theories predict that people draw MP and invalid affirming-the-consequent (AC) inferences. Three experiments tested these predictions. Participants read short stories that conformed to either the MP or AC form but without conclusions, and they completed either priming or recognition tasks. Results indicate that both MP and AC inferences occur during discourse processing: MP and AC premise forms prime their respective conclusions, participants erroneously judged that they had read the conclusions to MP and AC arguments, and AC inferences did not stem from a biconditional interpretation of conditionals. Findings support mental models theories.     

Conditional reasoning by mental models: chronometric and developmental evidence

The aim of this article is to verify two predictions resulting from the mental models theory of conditional reasoning. First, the denial of antecedent (DA) and modus tollens (MT) inferences should take longer to verify than modus ponens (MP) and affirmation of consequent (AC) because the former require subjects to flesh out the initial model whereas the latter do not. This prediction was confirmed in two reaction time experiments in adults. In line with Evans' proposal (Evans, J. St. B. T. (1993). The mental model theory of conditional reasoning: critical appraisal and revision. Cognition, 48, 1-20), there was a strong directionality effect: inferences from antecedent to consequent (MP and DA) took less time to verify than the inferences in the opposite direction (AC and MT). Second, the development of conditional reasoning should result from the increasing capacity to construct and coordinate more and more models. As a consequence, the pattern of conditional inference production should evolve with age from a one-model conjunctive pattern (production of MP and AC more frequent than DA and MT) to a three-model conditional production pattern (higher production rate for MP and MT than for DA and AC). This prediction was confirmed using an inference production task in children, adolescents, and adults.     

The processing of negations in conditional reasoning: A meta-analytic case study in mental model and/or mental logic theory

We present a meta-analytic review on the processing of negations in conditional reasoning about affirmation problems (Modus Ponens: “MP”, Affirmation of the Consequent “AC”) and denial problems (Denial of the Antecedent “DA”, and Modus Tollens “MT”). Findings correct previous generalisations about the phenomena. First, the effects of negation in the part of the conditional about which an inference is made, are not constrained to denial problems. These inferential-negation effects are also observed on AC. Second, there generally are reliable effects of a negation in the clause referred to by the categorical premise, and these referred-negation effects are constrained to the logically fallacious AC and DA inferences. All findings are presented and discussed in relation to contemporary mental model (MM) and mental logic (ML) theories. It is argued that a double-negation elimination hypothesis provides a sufficient explanation of inferential-negation effects within both MM theory and ML theory, if the latter is extended by a validating search for counter examples. Both MM and ML theories adhere to a processing scheme that allows them to incorporate an account of referred-negation effects based on the thesis that counter-example frequency is modulated by the scope of a contrast class delineated by a false affirmative. We conclude that MM and ML theories provide adequate processing schemes to accommodate for the explanatory hypotheses, at least in principle. In practice, both approaches remain equivocal as regards the connectivity and interactivity with long-term memory knowledge invoked in generating, manipulating, and testing the mental representations of negative state of affairs.     

命题内容对青少年条件推理的影响

选取3个具体内容的条件命题作为实验材料,以小四、初一、高一、大三的学生为被试,探讨了命题内容对青少年条件推理的影响机制及其发展特点。结果表明:(1)对同一年级而言,不同内容的条件命题的相同推理(MP、MT、DA、AC)之间表现出显著的差异;对不同年级而言,相同内容的条件命题的四种推理之间也存在显著的差异。(2)青少年的条件推理过程似乎是一种基于对事件发生概率估计的直觉判断,这一判断过程主要取决于个体知识经验的增长和主体认知水平的提高,而用形式逻辑的标准来衡量个体条件推理能力的高低似乎并不妥当。     

Deductive rationality in validating and testing conditional inferences

We asked people to validate conditional inferences (e.g., "A, therefore C" with "if A then C"). People are more likely to look for falsifications ("A and not-C") versus confirmations ("A and C") given a forced choice. Second, falsification rates are lower for logically valid versus invalid inferences. Logically valid inferences are inferences that follow necessarily. Experiment 1 (N = 96) shows that emphasising this logicality constraint increases falsification rates in the validation task and corroborates that validation-by-falsification increases logically correct inference evaluations. Experiment 2 (N = 41) corroborates the other way round that people who are more likely to make logically correct evaluations, show higher falsification performance in the validation task. The results support mental-models theory and suggest alternative theories similarly need to specify how people would go about looking for counterexamples. We proffer such a specification for two alternatives to the model theory. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved).     

Are conjunctive inferences easier than disjunctive inferences? A comparison of rules and models

We report four experiments investigating conjunctive inferences (from a conjunction and two conditional premises) and disjunctive inferences (from a disjunction and the same two conditionals). The mental model theory predicts that the conjunctive inferences, which require one model, should be easier than the disjunctive inferences, which require multiple models. Formal rule theories predict either the opposite result or no difference between the inferences. The experiments showed that the inferences were equally easy when the participants evaluated given conclusions, but that the conjunctive inferences were easier than the disjunctive inferences (1) when the participants drew their own conclusions, (2) when the conjunction and disjunction came last in the premises, (3) in the time the participants spent reading the premises and in responding to given conclusions, and (4) in their ratings of the difficulty of the inferences. The results support the model theory and demonstrate the importance of reasoners' inferential strategies.     

An ERP investigation of conditional reasoning with emotional and neutral contents

In two experiments we investigate conditional reasoning using event-related potentials (ERPs). Our goal was to examine the time course of inference making in two conditional forms, one logically valid (Modus Ponens, MP) and one logically invalid (Affirming the Consequent, AC). We focus particularly on the involvement of semantically-based inferential processes potentially marked by modulations of the N400. We also compared reasoning about emotional and neutral contents with separate sets of stimuli of differing linguistic complexity across the two experiments. Both MP and AC modulated the N400 component, suggesting the involvement of a semantically-based inferential mechanism common across different logical forms, content types, and linguistic features of the problems. Emotion did not have an effect on early components, and did not interact with components related to inference making. There was a main effect of emotion in the 800–1050 ms time window, consistent with an effect on sustained attention. The results suggest that conditional reasoning is not a purely formal process but that it importantly implicates semantic processing, and that the effect of emotion on reasoning does not primarily operate through a modulation of early automatic stages of information processing.     

Bias in Conditional Inference: Implications for Mental Models and Mental Logic

Three experiments are reported in which subjects are given the opportunity to make any of the four inferences associated with conditional statements: modus ponens (MP), denial of the antecedent (DA), affirmation of the consequent (AC), and modus tollens (MT). The primary purpose of the research was to establish the generality and robustness of polarity biases that may be occasioned by systematic rotation of negative components in the conditional rules. In Experiments 1 & 2, three forms of conditionals were used: “if (not) p then (not) q”, “(not) p only if (not) q” and “(not) q if (not) p”. Experiment 1 used a conclusion evaluation task, whereas Experiment 2 used a conclusion production task. In Experiment 3, thematic conditionals were presented with and without a preceding scenario.

The biases investigated were (a) affirmative premise bias—the tendency to draw more inferences from affirmative premises and (b) negative conclusion bias—the tendency to draw more inferences with negative conclusions. The suggestive evidence for affirmative premise bias in the literature was not supported: very little evidence was found for it in the current experiments. Robust findings of negative conclusion bias were, however, found across the three experiments, although the bias was mostly restricted to DA and MT inferences. This suggests that the bias is best regarded as a difficulty with double negation.

The results are discussed with respect to both the mental logic and mental model accounts of propositional reasoning. Neither theory as currently formulated can explain all of our findings, although a plausible revision of each is considered.     

Causal conditional reasoning and semantic memory retrieval: a test of the semantic memory framework

This study tested and refined a framework that proposes a mechanism for retrieving alternative causes and disabling conditions (Cummins, 1995) during reasoning. Experiment 1 examined the relation between different factors affecting retrieval. The test revealed high correlations between the number of possible alternative causes or disabling conditions and their strength of association and plausibility. Experiment 2 explored the hypothesis that due to a more extended search process, conditional inferences would last longer when many alternative causes or disabling conditions were available. Affirmation of the consequent (AC) and modus ponens (MP) latencies showed the hypothesized pattern. Denial of the antecedent (DA) and modus tollens (MT) inferences did not show latency effects. The experiment also identified an effect of the number of disabling conditions on AC and DA acceptance. Experiment 3 measured efficiency of disabler retrieval by a limited time, disabler generation task. As predicted, better disabler retrieval was related to lower acceptance of the MP and MT inferences.