Chapter 10: Reasoning and Intelligence
1. Analogy: as a Basis for reasoning:
a. Analogies are similarities in behavior, functions, or relationships in otherwise different
entities or situations.
b. Scientists and also nonscientists often use analogies to make sense of observations and
generate new hypotheses.
c. Analogies are commonly used in legal and political persuasion.
d. The Miller Analogies Test and Raven’s Progressive Matrices measure an individual’s
ability to see and apply analogies.
2. Inductive Reasoning: (hypothesis construction)
a. In inductive reasoning, a proposition is inferred on the basis of specific observations or
facts. We are generally good at inductive reasoning, but are susceptible to certain biases.
b. The Availability Bias:
i. Our tendency to give too much weight to information that comes more easily to
mind than does our relevant information.
ii. Relate to false fame effect: heavily publicized things are more available to
consciousness recall than are the less publicized events. (p.356)
c. The Confirmation Bias:
i. Leads us to try to confirm rather than disconfirm our current hypothesis.
Logically, a hypothesis cannot be proven, only disproven.
ii. Two different ways researchers have demonstrated confirmation bias:
Interview and determine introvert and extrovert and determined that
people ask questions where yes answers would go towards their
hypothesis. This bias, coupled with the natural tendency of interviewees
to respond to all such questions in the affirmative, gave most subjects
confidence in the initial hypothesis, regardless of which hypothesis that
was or whom they had interviewed. (Skov & Sherman, 1986; Snyder,
Doctors will misdiagnose people because they’ll have a hypothesis of
what your ailment is and then find evidence to support the hypothesis.
d. The Predictable-World Bias:
i. Leads us to arrive at predictions through induction even when events are
ii. Example: games of pure chance; gambling. Even when people consciously “know”
that the results are purely chance.
3. The Concrete Nature of Deductive Reasoning:
a. Deductive is the derivation of conclusions that must be true if the premises are true.
Syllogisms are classic examples of deductive- reasoning problems.
i. Syllogisms: presents a major premise (propositions) and a minor premise that
you must comb