There is no need for (even fully fleshed out) mental models to map onto formal logic

1993 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-364
Author(s):  
Paul Pollard
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
pp. 95-118
Author(s):  
Peter Langland-Hassan

Three types of conditional are distinguished: the material conditional, indicative conditional, and subjunctive/counterfactual conditional. The apparent difference in truth conditions of each is suggestive of different psychological procedures used in the evaluation of each. The psychology of the material conditional is then examined. Despite procedures in formal logic that are suggestive of sui generis imaginative states (e.g., “assuming” a proposition for conditional proof, or for reductio), we need not countenance the use of such states within the psychological procedures used to carry out the inferences. Further, work in psychology has long suggested that humans do not, as a rule, reason in accordance with normative standards appropriate to the material conditional. A popular alternative proposal in psychology is that conditional reasoning involves the use of mental models (Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 2002). The use of mental models is shown to be consistent with conditional reasoning involving only sequences of beliefs.


Author(s):  
Burkhard Müller ◽  
Jürgen Gehrke

Abstract. Planning interactions with the physical world requires knowledge about operations; in short, mental operators. Abstractness of content and directionality of access are two important properties to characterize the representational units of this kind of knowledge. Combining these properties allows four classes of knowledge units to be distinguished that can be found in the literature: (a) rules, (b) mental models or schemata, (c) instances, and (d) episodes or chunks. The influence of practicing alphabet-arithmetic operators in a prognostic, diagnostic, or retrognostic way (A + 2 = ?, A? = C, or ? + 2 = C, respectively) on the use of that knowledge in a subsequent test was used to assess the importance of these dimensions. At the beginning, the retrognostic use of knowledge was worse than the prognostic use, although identical operations were involved (A + 2 = ? vs. ? - 2 = A). This disadvantage was reduced with increased practice. Test performance was best if the task and the letter pairs were the same as in the acquisition phase. Overall, the findings support theories proposing multiple representational units of mental operators. The disadvantage for the retrognosis task was recovered in the test phase, and may be evidence for the importance of the order of events independent of the order of experience.


1992 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 438-439
Author(s):  
Richard A. Griggs
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Vargas ◽  
Sergio Moreno-Rios ◽  
Candida Castro ◽  
Geoffrey Underwood

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pia Justen ◽  
Robert R. van Doorn ◽  
Fred Zijlstra ◽  
Jelke van der Pal

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Arreola ◽  
Erika Robinson-Morral ◽  
Danielle A. S. Crough ◽  
Ben G. Wigert ◽  
Brad Hullsiek ◽  
...  

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Kowollik ◽  
Eric A. Day ◽  
Jazmine Espejo ◽  
Lauren E. McEntire ◽  
Paul R. Boatman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document