因果条件和非因果条件:解释和推理的综合模型。

Andrea Weidenfeld, Klaus Oberauer, Robin Hörnig
{"title":"因果条件和非因果条件:解释和推理的综合模型。","authors":"Andrea Weidenfeld,&nbsp;Klaus Oberauer,&nbsp;Robin Hörnig","doi":"10.1080/02724980443000719","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We present an integrated model for the understanding of and the reasoning from conditional statements. Central assumptions from several approaches are integrated into a causal path model. According to the model, the cognitive availability of exceptions to a conditional reduces the subjective conditional probability of the consequent, given the antecedent. This conditional probability determines people's degree of belief in the conditional, which in turn affects their willingness to accept logically valid inferences. In addition to this indirect pathway, the model contains a direct pathway: Availability of exceptional situations directly reduces the endorsement of valid inferences. We tested the integrated model with three experiments using conditional statements embedded in pseudonaturalistic cover stories. An explicitly mentioned causal link between antecedent and consequent was either present (causal conditionals) or absent (arbitrary conditionals). The model was supported for the causal but not for the arbitrary conditional statements.</p>","PeriodicalId":77437,"journal":{"name":"The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology","volume":"58 8","pages":"1479-513"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02724980443000719","citationCount":"47","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Causal and noncausal conditionals: an integrated model of interpretation and reasoning.\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Weidenfeld,&nbsp;Klaus Oberauer,&nbsp;Robin Hörnig\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02724980443000719\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We present an integrated model for the understanding of and the reasoning from conditional statements. Central assumptions from several approaches are integrated into a causal path model. According to the model, the cognitive availability of exceptions to a conditional reduces the subjective conditional probability of the consequent, given the antecedent. This conditional probability determines people's degree of belief in the conditional, which in turn affects their willingness to accept logically valid inferences. In addition to this indirect pathway, the model contains a direct pathway: Availability of exceptional situations directly reduces the endorsement of valid inferences. We tested the integrated model with three experiments using conditional statements embedded in pseudonaturalistic cover stories. An explicitly mentioned causal link between antecedent and consequent was either present (causal conditionals) or absent (arbitrary conditionals). The model was supported for the causal but not for the arbitrary conditional statements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology\",\"volume\":\"58 8\",\"pages\":\"1479-513\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02724980443000719\",\"citationCount\":\"47\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980443000719\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980443000719","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 47

摘要

我们提出了一个对条件语句的理解和推理的综合模型。来自几种方法的中心假设被整合到因果路径模型中。根据该模型,在给定先行词的情况下,条件例外的认知可用性降低了结果的主观条件概率。这个条件概率决定了人们对这个条件的相信程度,进而影响他们接受逻辑有效推论的意愿。除了这种间接途径之外,该模型还包含一个直接途径:异常情况的可用性直接减少了对有效推论的认可。我们使用嵌入在伪自然主义封面故事中的条件语句进行了三个实验来测试集成模型。明确提到的先行词和后词之间的因果联系要么是存在的(因果条件句),要么是不存在的(任意条件句)。该模型支持因果命题,但不支持任意条件命题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Causal and noncausal conditionals: an integrated model of interpretation and reasoning.

We present an integrated model for the understanding of and the reasoning from conditional statements. Central assumptions from several approaches are integrated into a causal path model. According to the model, the cognitive availability of exceptions to a conditional reduces the subjective conditional probability of the consequent, given the antecedent. This conditional probability determines people's degree of belief in the conditional, which in turn affects their willingness to accept logically valid inferences. In addition to this indirect pathway, the model contains a direct pathway: Availability of exceptional situations directly reduces the endorsement of valid inferences. We tested the integrated model with three experiments using conditional statements embedded in pseudonaturalistic cover stories. An explicitly mentioned causal link between antecedent and consequent was either present (causal conditionals) or absent (arbitrary conditionals). The model was supported for the causal but not for the arbitrary conditional statements.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信