Children'S Syllogistic Reasoning

Johnson‐Laird, P. N.; Oakhill, Jane; Bull, Deborah

doi:10.1080/14640748608401584

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The available WM capacity was more predictive of the interpretational level of conditionals than age. Our results are more convincing than those of Johnson-Laird et al (1986). In effect, those authors failed to find a significant correlation between syllogistic reasoning performance and an alphabet transformation task.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 76%

“…Of course, this task is known to be one of the most accurate measures of WM capacity (Kyllonen & Christal, 1990), and Barrouillet (1996) used it successfully in predicting reasoning performance in adults. However, as pointed out by Johnson-Laird et al (1986), this task is extremely difficult, especially for children, and the counting span task could be better for developmental studies. Moreover, the conditional task we used could be more appropriate in investigating the capacity to construct mental models than a verbally presented syllogistic task.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In a study into syllogistic reasoning in children, Johnson-Laird, Oakhill, and Bull (1986) calculated the correlation between WM capacities in 11-year-old children (evaluated from an alphabet transformation task) and their performance on syllogistic reasoning problems that required from one to three models. Unfortunately, this correlation did not reach significance (Spearman's r = 0.36).…”

Section: Downloaded By [University Of Saskatchewan Library] At 19:00 mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mental Models in Conditional Reasoning and Working Memory

Barrouillet¹,

Lecas²

1999

Thinking & Reasoning

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

s mental models theory claims that reasoning is a semantic process of construction and manipulation of models in working memory of limited capacity. Accordingly, both a deduction and a given interpretation of a premise would be all the harder the higher the number of models they require. The purpose of the present experiment was twofold. First, it aimed to demonstrate that the interpretation of if … then conditional sentences in children (third, sixth, and ninth graders) evolves as a function of the number of models the children can produce. We proposed a theory of conditional reasoning development that hypothesises a developmental trend of three successive levels of interpretations underlain by one, two, and then three models, i.e. conjunctive, biconditional, and conditional respectively. Second, we aimed to show that these different levels correlate with working memory capacities: the higher the working memory span, the higher the number of models underlying the conditional interpretation. These two hypotheses were verified, supporting the mental models theory. The results are compared with the rival theory of mental logic.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Downloaded By [University Of Saskatchewan Library] At 19:00 mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mental Models in Conditional Reasoning and Working Memory

Barrouillet¹,

Lecas²

1999

Thinking & Reasoning

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For purposes of comparison, we have carried out a meta-analysis of experiments, which we present below after our review of the theories. One prior result was that some syllogisms are so easy that children spontaneously draw valid conclusions to them (Johnson-Laird et al, 1986), whereas others are so difficult that hardly any adults can cope with them (Johnson-Laird & Steedman, 1978).…”

Section: Syllogistic Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theories of the syllogism: A meta-analysis.

Khemlani

Johnson‐Laird

2012

Psychological Bulletin

151

161

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Syllogisms are arguments about the properties of entities. They consist of 2 premises and a conclusion, which can each be in 1 of 4 “moods”: All A are B, Some A are B, No A are B, and Some A are not B. Their logical analysis began with Aristotle, and their psychological investigation began over 100 years ago. This article outlines the logic of inferences about syllogisms, which includes the evaluation of the consistency of sets of assertions. It also describes the main phenomena of reasoning about properties. There are 12 extant theories of such inferences, and the article outlines each of them and describes their strengths and weaknesses. The theories are of 3 main sorts: heuristic theories that capture principles that could underlie intuitive responses, theories of deliberative reasoning based on formal rules of inference akin to those of logic, and theories of deliberative reasoning based on set-theoretic diagrams or models. The article presents a meta-analysis of these extant theories of syllogisms using data from 6 studies. None of the 12 theories provides an adequate account, and so the article concludes with a guide—based on its qualitative and quantitative analyses—of how best to make progress toward a satisfactory theory.

show abstract

“…The scalability of Soar is well demonstrated, and in principle it might be extended to incorporate developmental aspects of syllogistic reasoning. Finally, models of reasoning complying with the Mental Model Theory have been proposed for syllogistic, propositional and relational reasoning separately; all of them are supported by experimental evidence, and the latest contributions also give a developmental account of the subjects' performance (Bara, Bucciarelli & Johnson-Laird, 1995;Bara, Bucciarelli, Johnson-Laird & Lombardo, 1994;Johnson-Laird, Oakhill & Bull, 1986). Moreover, MMT has been successfully applied to probabilistic reasoning (Johnson-Laird, Legrenzi, Girotto, Sonino-Legrenzi & Caverni, 1999;Johnson-Laird & Savary, 1996), temporal reasoning (Schaeken, Johnson-Laird & d'Ydewalle, 1996;Vandierendonck, De Vooght & Dierckx, 2000), causal reasoning (Geminiani, Carassa & Bara, 1996;van der Henst, 1999), modal reasoning (Bell & Johnson-Laird, 1998;Goldvarg & Johnson-Laird, 2000), counterfactual thinking (Byrne, 1997;Byrne & McEleny, 2000), pragmatics (Manktelow, Fairley, Kilparick & Over, 2000;Sperber, Cara & Girotto, 1995), decision making (Devetag, Legrenzi & Warglien, 2000;Legrenzi, Girotto & Johnson-Laird, 1993), along with other sorts of thinking (for a review, see Garcìa-Madruga, Carriedo & Gonzalez-Labra, 2000;Garnham & Oakhill, 1996).…”

Section: A Review Of the Current Theories Of Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model theory of deduction: a unified computational approach

Bara¹

2001

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most debated questions in psychology and cognitive science is the nature and the functioning of the mental processes involved in deductive reasoning. However, all existing theories refer to a specific deductive domain, like syllogistic, propositional or relational reasoning.Our goal is to unify the main types of deductive reasoning into a single set of basic procedures. In particular, we bring together the microtheories developed from a mental models perspective in a single theory, for which we provide a formal foundation. We validate the theory through a computational model (UNICORE) which allows fine-grained predictions of subjects' performance in different reasoning domains.The performance of the model is tested against the performance of experimental subjects-as reported in the relevant literature-in the three areas of syllogistic, relational and propositional reasoning. The computational model proves to be a satisfactory artificial subject, reproducing both correct and erroneous performance of the human subjects. Moreover, we introduce a developmental trend in the program, in order to simulate the performance of subjects of different ages, ranging from children (3-6) to adolescents (8 -12) to adults (Ͼ21). The simulation model performs similarly to the subjects of different ages.Our conclusion is that the validity of the mental model approach is confirmed for the deductive reasoning domain, and that it is possible to devise a unique mechanism able to deal with the specific subareas. The proposed computational model (UNICORE) represents such a unifying structure.

show abstract

Children'S Syllogistic Reasoning

Cited by 26 publications

References 16 publications

Mental Models in Conditional Reasoning and Working Memory

Mental Models in Conditional Reasoning and Working Memory

Theories of the syllogism: A meta-analysis.

Model theory of deduction: a unified computational approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About