The Handbook of Education and Human Development 1998
DOI: 10.1111/b.9780631211860.1998.00008.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rethinking the Concept of Learning Disabilities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 135 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The experimental task utilized in this study was based on the belief-bias syllogistic reasoning paradigm (J. S. Evans et al, 1983), which aims to assess an individual’s ability to engage in logical reasoning when confronted with conflicts between prior beliefs and logic (Stanovich & Stanovich, 2010; West et al, 2008). To capture the fundamental processes involved in belief-bias reasoning, the study manipulated the logical validity (valid vs. invalid) and believability (believable vs. unbelievable) of the conclusions in each syllogism, resulting in two types of syllogisms: incongruent (believable-invalid; unbelievable-valid) and congruent (believable-valid; unbelievable-invalid) syllogisms.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The experimental task utilized in this study was based on the belief-bias syllogistic reasoning paradigm (J. S. Evans et al, 1983), which aims to assess an individual’s ability to engage in logical reasoning when confronted with conflicts between prior beliefs and logic (Stanovich & Stanovich, 2010; West et al, 2008). To capture the fundamental processes involved in belief-bias reasoning, the study manipulated the logical validity (valid vs. invalid) and believability (believable vs. unbelievable) of the conclusions in each syllogism, resulting in two types of syllogisms: incongruent (believable-invalid; unbelievable-valid) and congruent (believable-valid; unbelievable-invalid) syllogisms.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ability of people to evaluate evidence and arguments during reasoning independently of prior beliefs has been regarded as a core aspect of critical thinking (Halpern, 2014; Stanovich & Stanovich, 2010; West et al, 2008). Prior beliefs influence our perceptions of new information.…”
Section: Critical Thinking and Addressing Belief Bias During Reasoningmentioning
confidence: 99%