237
Views
34
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Think-aloud protocols and the selection task: Evidence for relevance effects and rationalisation processes

&
Pages 35-66 | Published online: 01 Oct 2010

Keep up to date with the latest research on this topic with citation updates for this article.

Read on this site (10)

Mikkel Gerken. (2023) Stability and cognitive architecture: response to Machery. Inquiry 0:0, pages 1-9.
Read now
Raymond S. Nickerson, Susan F. Butler & Daniel H. Barch. (2017) Set size, assertion form, thematic content and sampling in the selection task. Thinking & Reasoning 23:2, pages 134-157.
Read now
Jonathan St B. T. Evans. (2016) Reasoning, biases and dual processes: The lasting impact of Wason (1960). The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 69:10, pages 2076-2092.
Read now
Gordon Pennycook. (2015) Domain generality in religious cognition. Religion, Brain & Behavior 5:3, pages 247-250.
Read now
Valerie Thompson & JonathanSt. B. T. Evans. (2012) Belief bias in informal reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning 18:3, pages 278-310.
Read now
JonathanSt. B. T. Evans. (2012) Questions and challenges for the new psychology of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning 18:1, pages 5-31.
Read now
Lucie Shanahan, Lindy McAllister & Michael Curtin. (2011) The Party Planning Task: A useful tool in the functional assessment of planning skills in adolescents with TBI. Brain Injury 25:11, pages 1080-1090.
Read now
JonathanSt B T Evans. (2010) Intuition and Reasoning: A Dual-Process Perspective. Psychological Inquiry 21:4, pages 313-326.
Read now
JonathanSt. B. T. Evans & Linden J. Ball. (2010) Do people reason on the Wason selection task? A new look at the data of Ball et al. (2003). The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 63:3, pages 434-441.
Read now

Articles from other publishers (24)

Ben William Morrison, Kathryn Bergin, Joshua Kelson, Natalie May Virginia Morrison, John Michael Innes, Gregory Zelic, Yeslam Al-Saggaf & Manoranjan Paul. (2023) Decision Support Systems (DSSs) ‘In the Wild’: The Factors That Influence Users’ Acceptance of DSSs in Naturalistic Settings. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making 17:4, pages 332-350.
Crossref
Hayoung Jung & Yeongmog Park. (2023) A Protocol Analysis of Designers’ Reasoning and Fallacies in Design Concept Generation. Archives of Design Research 36:3, pages 341-355.
Crossref
Steven Bland. (2022) In defence of epistemic vices. Synthese 200:1.
Crossref
Matthias Michel & Megan A. K. Peters. (2020) Confirmation bias without rhyme or reason. Synthese 199:1-2, pages 2757-2772.
Crossref
. 2021. L’énigme de la raison. L’énigme de la raison 411 434 .
Feng Xiao, Tie Sun, Xue-Li Cai & Qing-Fei Chen. (2020) Task relevance effect on number/shape conflict detection in the number-matching task: An ERP study. Acta Psychologica 208, pages 103126.
Crossref
Jean-François Bonnefon. (2016) The Pros and Cons of Identifying Critical Thinking with System 2 Processing. Topoi 37:1, pages 113-119.
Crossref
T. Parent. (2015) The Empirical Case against Infallibilism. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7:1, pages 223-242.
Crossref
María Dolores Valiña & Montserrat Martín. (2016) The Influence of Semantic and Pragmatic Factors in Wason’s Selection Task: State of the Art. Psychology 07:06, pages 925-940.
Crossref
Edward J. N. Stupple & Linden J. Ball. (2014) The intersection between Descriptivism and Meliorism in reasoning research: further proposals in support of ‘soft normativism’. Frontiers in Psychology 5.
Crossref
Romain Boissonnade, Valérie Tartas & Michèle Guidetti. (2014) Toward a Cultural-Historical Perspective on the Selection Task. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science 48:3, pages 341-364.
Crossref
Paul Benjamin Lowry, Nathan W. Twyman, Matt Pickard, Jeffrey L. Jenkins & Quang “Neo” Bui. (2014) Proposing the Affect-Trust Infusion Model (ATIM) to explain and predict the influence of high and low affect infusion on Web vendor trust. Information & Management 51:5, pages 579-594.
Crossref
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans & Keith E. Stanovich. (2013) Theory and Metatheory in the Study of Dual Processing. Perspectives on Psychological Science 8:3, pages 263-271.
Crossref
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans & Keith E. Stanovich. (2013) Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science 8:3, pages 223-241.
Crossref
Hugo Mercier. (2011) Looking for Arguments. Argumentation 26:3, pages 305-324.
Crossref
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning. The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning 115 133 .
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans & Shira Elqayam. (2011) Towards a descriptivist psychology of reasoning and decision making. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34:5, pages 275-290.
Crossref
Edward J. N. Stupple & Linden J. Ball. (2011) Normative benchmarks are useful for studying individual differences in reasoning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34:5, pages 270-271.
Crossref
Jonathan St.B.T. Evans. (2011) Dual-process theories of reasoning: Contemporary issues and developmental applications. Developmental Review 31:2-3, pages 86-102.
Crossref
Kelly Y. L. Ku & Irene T. Ho. (2010) Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning 5:3, pages 251-267.
Crossref
Catherine D. DarkerDavid P. French. (2009) What sense do people make of a theory of planned behaviour questionnaire?. Journal of Health Psychology 14:7, pages 861-871.
Crossref
Johannes C Cronjé & Johann Fouche. (2008) Alternatives in evaluating multimedia in secondary school science teaching. Computers & Education 51:2, pages 559-583.
Crossref
Mike Oaksford, Nick Chater & Ulrike Hahn. 2012. Reasoning. Reasoning 383 413 .
Keith E. Stanovich, Maggie E. Toplak & Richard F. West. 2008. 251 285 .

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.