2009
DOI: 10.3758/mc.37.6.759
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phonological and visual distinctiveness effects in syllogistic reasoning: Implications for mental models theory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
(36 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Distinctiveness may simply equate with uniqueness, or there may be multiple aspects to this construct. The concept of odour distinctiveness does, however, seem highly compatible with memory research that has revealed the importance of distinctiveness in other sensory and perceptual modalities such as vision (e.g., Ball & Quayle, 2009; Howe, 2008; Hunt & Worthen, 2006; Schmidt, 1991). Finally, we acknowledge that the sample of odours that was studied in our three experiments was relatively small (though larger than what has been used in previous research), and that there are likely to be many dimensions on which odours reflect similarities and differences to one another beyond the properties examined here.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…Distinctiveness may simply equate with uniqueness, or there may be multiple aspects to this construct. The concept of odour distinctiveness does, however, seem highly compatible with memory research that has revealed the importance of distinctiveness in other sensory and perceptual modalities such as vision (e.g., Ball & Quayle, 2009; Howe, 2008; Hunt & Worthen, 2006; Schmidt, 1991). Finally, we acknowledge that the sample of odours that was studied in our three experiments was relatively small (though larger than what has been used in previous research), and that there are likely to be many dimensions on which odours reflect similarities and differences to one another beyond the properties examined here.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…Use of such pseudo-problems as a control condition could be helpful in determining whether De Neys and colleagues' effects are driven by formal or content-related surface features that accidentally covary with the normative implications or whether the normative implications themselves are causally responsible. 6 One criticism of this control condition might be based on Ball and Quayle (2009), who contrasted syllogisms in which all terms were phonologically nondistinctive (e.g., Some bubs are bebs. No bebs are babs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, working memory capacity is higher for perceptually distinct than for perceptually similar items (e.g. Logie, Della Sala, Wynn & Baddeley, ), and syllogistic reasoning performance is also better for terms that are perceptually dissimilar (Ball & Quayle, ). Regarding abstract and concrete words, it is a classic finding in the memory literature that it is easier to recall, recognize and make lexical decisions about concrete than abstract words (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%