Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Necessity, possibility and belief: A study of syllogistic reasoning

Jonathan St B T Evans*, Simon J. Handley, Catherine N J Harper

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The present study extended the investigation of the belief bias effect in syllogistic reasoning in two ways: (1) The effect was studied under instructions to decide whether conclusions were possible, as well as necessary, given the premises; and (2) the effect was studied for types of syllogism where people rarely endorse the conclusions as well as those (valid and fallacious) where endorsements are common. Three experiments are reported, which show first that there is a marked tendency to reject unbelievable conclusions relative to abstract or neutral controls on all kinds of syllogism and under both types of instruction. There was also significant evidence of positive belief bias (increased acceptance of believable conclusions) and of interactions between belief bias effects and logical form. The results are discussed with particular respect to accounts of belief bias offered by theorists in the mental-model tradition.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)935-958
Number of pages24
JournalQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology
Volume54
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Necessity, possibility and belief: A study of syllogistic reasoning'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this