scholarly journals Does Aristotelian logic describe human reasoning? Valid syllogisms and canonical models

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Cognitive Effort ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Canonical Models ◽  
Aristotelian Logic ◽  
Mental Models Theory

In the case of quantified propositions, the mental models theory distinguishes between canonical and noncanonical models. While people identify the canonical models in an immediate, rapid, and easy way, the noncanonical models cannot be detected without reflection and cognitive effort. In this paper, I try to show that all of the valid syllogisms in Aristotelian logic can be considered to be correct by resorting only to the canonical models of their sentences. In this way, I argue that this means that Aristotelian logic can be a useful criterion to explain, describe, and even predict people’s conclusions from quantified assertions.

scholarly journals The Problems of the Mental Logic with the Double Negation: The Necessity of a Semantic Approach

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-153
Author(s):  
Miguel López-Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Semantic Approach ◽  
Cognitive Theories ◽  
Ancient Times ◽  
Syntactic Theories ◽  
Mental Logic ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Abstract The double negation has always been considered by the logical systems from ancient times to the present. In fact, that is an issue that the current syntactic theories studying human reasoning, for example, the mental logic theory, address today. However, in this paper, I claim that, in the case of some languages such as Spanish, the double negation causes problems for the cognitive theories mainly based on formal schemata and supporting the idea of a universal syntax of thought in the human mind. Thus, I propose that, given those problems, semantic frameworks such as that of the mental models theory seem to be more appropriate for explaining the human inferential activity.

Mental models theory and relevance theory in quantificational reasoning

2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 345-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Nicolle
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Relevance Theory ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Linguistic Pragmatics ◽  
Procedural Information ◽  
Reasoning Tasks ◽  
The Way ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Human reasoning involving quantified statements is one area in which findings from cognitive psychology and linguistic pragmatics complement each other. I will show how mental models theory provides a promising account of the mechanisms underlying peoples’ performance in three types of reasoning tasks involving quantified premises and conclusions. I will further suggest that relevance theory can help to explain the way in which mental models are employed in the reasoning processes. Conversely, mental models theory suggests that human reasoning typically does not involve deductive rules, which in turn entails a modification to the nature of the deductive processes proposed by relevance theory. The mechanism proposed by mental models theory also helps to clarify the nature of the relevance theory distinction between conceptual and procedural information.

scholarly journals Evolved Mechanisms Versus Underlying Conditional Relations

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel López Astorga
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Social Exchange ◽  
Alternative Explanation ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
Human Reasoning ◽  
Social Contracts ◽  
The Social ◽  
Conditional Relations ◽  
Social Contracts Theory ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Abstract The social contracts theory claims that, in social exchange circumstances, human reasoning is not necessarily led by logic, but by certain evolved mental mechanisms that are useful for catching offenders. An emblematic experiment carried out with the intention to prove this thesis is the first experiment described by Fiddick, Cosmides, and Tooby in their paper of 2000. Lopez Astorga has questioned that experiment claiming that its results depend on an underlying conditional logical form not taken into account by Fiddick, Cosmides, and Tooby. In this paper, I propose an explanation alternative to that of Lopez Astorga, which does not depend on logical forms and is based on the mental models theory. Thus, I conclude that this other alternative explanation is one more proof that the experiment in question does not demonstrate the fundamental thesis of the social contracts theory.

Deontic Reasoning, Mental Models Theory and Traffic Signs Information

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Vargas ◽  
Sergio Moreno-Rios ◽  
Candida Castro ◽  
Geoffrey Underwood
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Traffic Signs ◽  
Deontic Reasoning ◽  
Mental Models Theory

Mental Models: Theory and Application in Human Factors

1989 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 617-634 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Wilson ◽  
Andrew Rutherford
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Representation ◽  
Human Factors ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Psychological Perspective ◽  
Forms Of Knowledge ◽  
Mental Models Theory

This review points out confusion surrounding the concept and use of mental models from the viewpoints of both human factors and psychology. Noted are the ways in which the notion is conceived according to the needs and approaches of different specialties, and the relationships of mental models to other forms of knowledge representation are considered. The manner in which the human factors community has and should utilize the concept in applications across a number of fields is addressed and discussed in relation to the psychological perspective.

Action Regulation Theory

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannes Zacher
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
High Efficiency ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Cognitive Effort ◽  
Work Behavior ◽  
Cognitive Representations ◽  
Regulation Theory ◽  
Régulation Theory ◽  
Efficiency And Effectiveness

Action regulation theory is a meta-theory on the regulation of goal-directed behavior. The theory explains how workers regulate their behavior through cognitive processes, including goal development and selection, internal and external orientation, planning, monitoring of execution, and feedback processing. Moreover, action regulation theory focuses on the links between these cognitive processes, behavior, the objective environment, and objective outcomes. The action regulation process occurs on multiple levels of action regulation, including the sensorimotor or skill level, the level of flexible action patterns, the intellectual or conscious level, and the meta-cognitive heuristic level. These levels range from unconscious and automatized control of actions to conscious thought, and from muscular action to thought processes. Action regulation at lower levels in this hierarchy is more situation specific and requires less cognitive effort than action regulation at higher levels. Workers further develop action-oriented mental models that include long-term cognitive representations of input conditions, goals, plans, and expected and prescribed results of action, as well as knowledge about the boundary conditions of action and the transformation procedures that turn goals into expected results. The accuracy and level of detail of such action-oriented mental models is closely associated with the efficiency and effectiveness of action regulation. One of three foci can be in the foreground of action regulation: task, social context, or self. A task focus is most strongly associated with high efficiency and effectiveness of action regulation, because it links task-related goals with relevant plans, behavior, and feedback. Action regulation theory has been applied to understand several phenomena in the field of industrial, work, and organizational psychology, including proactive work behavior, work-related learning and error management, entrepreneurship, occupational strain and well-being, reciprocal influences between personality and work, innovation, teamwork, career development, and successful aging at work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document