Textbook Notes (368,448)
Canada (161,882)
Psychology (3,337)
PSYC 2650 (228)
Chapter 13

Chapter 13 Cognitive Psychology

5 Pages
110 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYC 2650
Professor
Anneke Olthof
Semester
Winter

Description
Chapter 13 Reasoning: Thinking Through the Implications of What You Know - Deduction: a process through which we start with claims or assertions that we count as “given” and ask what follows from these premises o Prediction based on our beliefs - If we make deduction based on our beliefs then we turn out to be wrong, that tells us that something is wrong with our beliefs Confirmation and Disconfirmation Confirmation Bias - a strong tendency to seek out confirming evidence and to rely on that evidence to make conclusions - people are far more likely to seek our information that reinforces their belief - when disconfirming evidence is found people tend to fail to use them in adjusting their beliefs - when people find confirming evidence they take it at face value Memory for Disconfirming Evidence - people accept confirming information at face value - Gilovich o People place bets on football teams o When they loose they insist that they were right in picking the right team but due to a fluke they lost o And when people win they were in correcting the right team too o Gamblers maintain their views despite the (seemingly) contrary evidence provided by their own empty wallets Belief Preservance - even when disconcerting evidence is undeniable and in plain view sometimes people don’t use it this is reffered to as belief preservance - L. Ross, Lepper o People were given suicide notes to read some were taken from the police and some were written by college students (fake) o Decide whether they were real or not o People who were told they were right continued to think that their social sensitivity was above average o Those who were told they were wrong preserved their beliefs o They search through their memory seeking information to confirm that they have good social sensitivity Logic Reasoning about Syllogisms - Categorical syllogisms: are a type of logical argument that begins with two assertions (the problems premises) each containing a statement about a category - Valid arguments (valid syllogisms) - invalid syllogism All P are M All S are M Therefore, all S are P - This is invalid, to see this we must think about it in a different way - All Plumbers are Mortal, All Sadists are Mortal, Therefore all Sadists are Plumbers - People who are asked to reason about syllogisms do quite poorly Sources of Logical Errors - Belief bias: if a syllogism’s conclusion happens to be something people believe is true already, they are more likely to judge the conclusion as following logically from the premises - If the conclusion happens to be something they already thought was false they easily reject the conclusion The Four-Card Task - Wason’s four card task - People are shown a set of 4 cards (A,6,J,7) - They are told if one card has a vowel on one side, it must have an even number on the other, which cards must be turned over to put this rule to the test? - Most people choose the A and the 6 - However the correct answer was to turn over the A and the 7 The Effects of Problem Content - Performance is much better in some variations of the four-card task - Griggs and Cox o “If a person is drinking beer then the person must be over 19” o There were four cards again (Drinking a beer, 16, 22, Drinking a coke) o People did much better on this task by selecting “Drinking a beer and 16) - This describes the rule of thought - It seems then that the way we think depends on what we’re thinking about Detecting Cheaters - Our ancestors needed to reason in terms of betrayal and reason - According to this proposal people in the modern world will reason well about a logical rule whenever they understand that rule as involving cheating or betrayal Pragmatic Reasoning Schemata - Pragmatic reasoning schemata: reasoning in situations that involve obligations or situations involving cause and effect relationships - People do better on reasoning experiments when their primary reasoning strategy is called into play - Four card task o People were given cards and asked which cards needed to be flipped over in order to correspond with the rule “If the form says ENTERING on one side then the other side includes cholera among the list of other diseases” o People given just this information did poorly on the card task o People that were given additional information such as “If a passenger wishes to enter the country, he or she must first receive a cholera inoculation” aka a rationale o They preformed much better because it seems when given a rational the primary reasoning strategies were triggered Necessity and Sufficiency - a necessary condition is something that must be true for the rest of the sentence to be true o “If Jacob passed his drivers test, then it’s legal for him to drive” - A sufficient condition is something that if true guarantees the conclusion is true o “If Solomon is eligible for jury duty then he is over 21” Deductive Logic: An Interim
More Less

Related notes for PSYC 2650

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit