Reasoning About Permitted Announcements

We formalize what it means to have permission to say something. We adapt the dynamic logic of permission by van der Meyden (J Log Comput 6(3):465–479, 1996) to the case where atomic actions are public truthful announcements. We also add a notion of obligation. Our logic is an extension of the logic of public announcements introduced by Plaza (1989) with dynamic modal operators for permission and for obligation. We axiomatize the logic and show that it is decidable.     

Reasoning About Uncertain Conditionals

There is a long tradition in formal epistemology and in the psychology of reasoning to investigate indicative conditionals. In psychology, the propositional calculus was taken for granted to be the normative standard of reference. Experimental tasks, evaluation of the participants’ responses and psychological model building, were inspired by the semantics of the material conditional. Recent empirical work on indicative conditionals focuses on uncertainty. Consequently, the normative standard of reference has changed. I argue why neither logic nor standard probability theory provide appropriate rationality norms for uncertain conditionals. I advocate coherence based probability logic as an appropriate framework for investigating uncertain conditionals. Detailed proofs of the probabilistic non-informativeness of a paradox of the material conditional illustrate the approach from a formal point of view. I survey selected data on human reasoning about uncertain conditionals which additionally support the plausibility of the approach from an empirical point of view.     

Reasoning About Social Choice Functions

We introduce a logic specifically designed to support reasoning about social choice functions. The logic includes operators to capture strategic ability, and operators to capture agent preferences. We establish a correspondence between formulae in the logic and properties of social choice functions, and show that the logic is expressively complete with respect to social choice functions, i.e., that every social choice function can be characterised as a formula of the logic. We prove that the logic is decidable, and give a complete axiomatization. To demonstrate the value of the logic, we show in particular how it can be applied to the problem of determining whether a social choice function is strategy-proof.     

Reasoning About Collectively Accepted Group Beliefs

A proof-theoretical treatment of collectively accepted group beliefs is presented through a multi-agent sequent system for an axiomatization of the logic of acceptance. The system is based on a labelled sequent calculus for propositional multi-agent epistemic logic with labels that correspond to possible worlds and a notation for internalized accessibility relations between worlds. The system is contraction- and cut-free. Extensions of the basic system are considered, in particular with rules that allow the possibility of operative members or legislators. Completeness with respect to the underlying Kripke semantics follows from a general direct and uniform argument for labelled sequent calculi extended with mathematical rules for frame properties. As an example of the use of the calculus we present an analysis of the discursive dilemma.     

Children's Social and Moral Reasoning About Exclusion

ABSTRACT— Developmental research on social and moral reasoning about exclusion has utilized a social-domain theory, in contrast to a global stage theory, to investigate children's evaluations of gender- and race-based peer exclusion. The social-domain model postulates that moral, social-conventional, and personal reasoning coexist in children's evaluations of inclusion and exclusion, and that the priority given to these forms of judgments varies by the age of the child, the context, and the target of exclusion. Findings from developmental intergroup research studies disconfirm a general-stage-model approach to morality in the child, and provide empirical data on the developmental origins and emergence of intergroup attitudes regarding prejudice, bias, and exclusion.     

Modeling Mental Spatial Reasoning About Cardinal Directions

This article presents research into human mental spatial reasoning with orientation knowledge. In particular, we look at reasoning problems about cardinal directions that possess multiple valid solutions (i.e., are spatially underdetermined), at human preferences for some of these solutions, and at representational and procedural factors that lead to such preferences. The article presents, first, a discussion of existing, related conceptual and computational approaches; second, results of empirical research into the solution preferences that human reasoners actually have; and, third, a novel computational model that relies on a parsimonious and flexible spatio‐analogical knowledge representation structure to robustly reproduce the behavior observed with human reasoners.     

Strategic Numeracy: Self-Serving Reasoning About Health Statistics

This research shows that the same people who appear to have low numerical competence when analyzing personally irrelevant health-related numerical information are able to overcome their reasoning shortcomings and make better judgments when they are shown equivalent information that is personally relevant, and when only a sophisticated kind of reasoning enables them to interpret this information in a favorable way. The fact that people can engage in poorer or more sophisticated numerical reasoning depending on whether that reasoning produces favorable or unfavorable conclusions has implications both for the concept of numeracy as an individual-difference variable and for health communication.     

Reasoning About Relations: Spatial and Nonspatial Problems

Two experiments investigated the mental representation of spatial and nonspatial two-dimensional problems. The experiments were designed to contrast opposite predictions of the model theory of reasoning and the formal rules of inference theories. Half of the problems required more inferential steps but only one model, whereas the other half required fewer inferential steps but two models. According to the inference rules, theory problems that require more inferential steps should be harder, whereas the model-based theory predicts that problems that require two models should be harder. In Experiments 1a and 1b we measured the problem solving time and the percentage of errors. In Experiments 2a and 2b the problems were presented segmented in two different displays. We measured the comprehension time for each display, the question answering times, and the percentage of errors. The results of all experiments supported the model theory predictions in both spatial and nonspatial domains.     

A STIT Logic for Reasoning About Social Influence

In this paper we propose a method for modeling social influence within the STIT approach to action. Our proposal consists in extending the STIT language with special operators that allow us to represent the consequences of an agent’s choices over the rational choices of another agent.     

Epistemological Development and Judgments and Reasoning About Teaching Methods

Children's, adolescents’, and adults’ (N = 96 7–8, 10–11, and 13–14-year-olds and university students) epistemological development and its relation to judgments and reasoning about teaching methods was examined. The domain (scientific or moral), nature of the topic (controversial or noncontroversial), and teaching method (direct instruction by lectures versus class discussions) were systematically varied. Epistemological development was assessed in the aesthetics, values, and physical truth domains. All participants took the domain, nature of the topic, and teaching method into consideration in ways that showed age-related variations. Epistemological development in the value domain alone was predictive of preferences for class discussions and a critical perspective on teacher-centered direct instruction, even when age was controlled in the analysis.     

Team Reasoning and the Rational Choice of Payoff-Dominant Outcomes in Games

Topoi - Standard game theory cannot explain the selection of payoff-dominant outcomes that are best for all players in common-interest games. Theories of team reasoning can explain why such...     

Interviewer Knowledge and Preschoolers' Reasoning About Knowledge States Moderate Suggestibility

Fifty-one preschoolers listened to a story and were interviewed about the details by a knowledgeable and a naı̈ve interviewer. Half the questions were straightforward and half were misleading. One-week later, children completed a recognition test to measure story memory and a set of theory-of-mind tasks to measure reasoning about mental states related to knowing. All children showed a misinformation effect at the initial interview. At the recognition test, a knowledgeable interviewer misled children who passed false-belief tasks more often than a naı̈ve interviewer did. Knowledgeable and naı̈ve interviewers misled children who failed false-belief tasks equally often. False-belief scores predicted the tendency to be misled more often by a knowledgeable interviewer relative to a naı̈ve interviewer, after controlling for age and memory when not misled. Elaborated cognitive processing and/or memory source monitoring may mediate the results.     

Spatial Proportional Reasoning Is Associated With Formal Knowledge About Fractions

Proportional reasoning involves thinking about parts and wholes (i.e., about fractional quantities). Yet, research on proportional reasoning and fraction learning has proceeded separately. This study assessed proportional reasoning and formal fraction knowledge in 8- to 10-year-olds. Participants (N = 52) saw combinations of cherry juice and water in displays that highlighted either part–whole or part–part relations. Their task was to indicate on a continuous rating scale how much each mixture would taste of cherries. Ratings suggested the use of a proportional integration rule for both kinds of displays, although more robustly and accurately for part–whole displays. The findings indicate that children may be more likely to scale proportional components when being presented with part–whole as compared with part–part displays. Crucially, ratings for part–whole problems correlated with fraction knowledge, even after controlling for age, suggesting that a sense of spatial proportions is associated with an understanding of fractional quantities.     

Arguing About Goals: The Diminishing Scope of Legal Reasoning

This article investigates the implications of goal-legislation for legal argumentation. In goal-regulation the legislator formulates the aims to be reached, leaving it to the norm-addressee to draft the necessary rules. On the basis of six types of hard cases, it is argued that in such a system there is hardly room for constructing a ratio legis. Legal interpretation is largely reduced to concretisation. This implies that legal argumentation tends to become highly dependent on expert (non-legal) knowledge.     

非言语学习不良青少年空间和非空间关系推理特点

目的:考查在图形和文字两种刺激材料条件下,非言语学习不良青少年空间关系和非空间关系推理特点及推理策略的使用.方法:从初中二年级中选取三组被试:非言语学习不良组(简称NLD,n=11)、言语学习不良组(简称VLD,n=11)和一般组(简称C,n=19),测量三组被试的推理特点及其推理策略.结果:在图形和文字刺激材料下,NLD组被试的空同关系推理成绩都显著低于一般青少年,而他们的非空间关系推理能力则与一般青少年没有显著差异;VLD青少年除了图形非空间关系推理外,其他三类推理成绩都显著低于一般青少年.结论:NLD青少年的空间关系推理能力低于非空间关系推理能力.两者存在分离现象;三组被试在推理策略使用的有效性方面存在差异.     

Competing Conceptions of Justice: Faculty Moral Reasoning About Affirmative Action

College faculty (N = 115) were recruited to investigate the influence of moral reasoning on hiring decisions about affirmative action dilemmas. Participants completed the Defining Issues Test (DIT), a standard test of moral reasoning, a measure that presented two hypothetical moral dilemmas about affirmative action that manipulated candidates' race and moral issues, and a scale evaluating the use of external norms versus self-chosen principles. Results indicated that moral issue but not race of a minority candidate affected hiring decisions. Faculty used greater percentages of principled reasoning when solving the more salient affirmative action dilemmas than when solving the hypothetical dilemmas of the DIT. Higher scores on the DIT were related to the use of principles rather than norms when making hiring decisions. Findings suggest that faculty decisions about hiring a hypothetical affirmative action candidate are more influenced by moral reasoning level and competing conceptions of justice than racial bias or ambivalence.