Considering too few alternatives: The mental model theory of extensional reasoning

REFERENCES

• Barrouillet, P., Gauffroy, C., & Lecas, J. (2008). Mental models and the suppositional account of conditionals. Psychological Review, 115, 760–771. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.3.760
   Google Scholar
• Byrne, R., & Johnson-Laird, P. (2009). ‘If’ and the problems of conditional reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 282–287. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.04.003
   Google Scholar
• Carey, J., & White, E. (1991). The effects of graphical versus numerical response on the accuracy of graph-based forecasts. Journal of Management, 17, 77–96. doi:10.1177/014920639101700106
   Google Scholar
• Chevalley, T., & Schaeken, W. (2013). Is the question clear enough? Learning to understand the premise used in extensional reasoning experiments. Unpublished manuscript, 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, A. (2013). Paper beats computer screens. ScienceNordic. Retrieved April 14, 2014, from http://sciencenordic.com/paper-beats-computer-screens
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J., Handley, S., Neilens, H., & Over, D. (2007). Thinking about conditionals: A study of individual differences. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1772–1784. doi:10.3758/BF03193509
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J., Handley, S., Neilens, H., & Over, D. (2008). Understanding causal conditionals: A study of individual differences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1291–1297. doi:10.1080/17470210802027961
   Google Scholar
• Fischhoff, B., & Bruine de Bruin, W. (1999). Fifty-fifty = 50%?. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 149–163. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199906)12:2149::AID-BDM3143.0.CO;2-J
   Google Scholar
• Fox, C., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2003). Partition priming in judgment under uncertainty. Psychological Science, 14, 195–200. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.02431
   Google Scholar
• Ihaka, R., & Gentleman, R. (1996). R: A language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 5, 299–314. doi:10.1080/10618600.1996.10474713
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P., & Byrne, R. (1991). Deduction. London / Hove: Laurence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P., Byrne, R., & Schaeken, W. (1992). Propositional reasoning by model. Psychological Review, 99, 418–439. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.99.3.418
   Google Scholar
• Johnson-Laird, P., Legrenzi, P., Girotto, V., Legrenzi, M., & Caverni, J. (1999). Naive probability: A mental model theory of extensional reasoning. Psychological Review, 106, 62–88. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.1.62
   Google Scholar
• Noyes, J., & Garland, K. (2008). Computer- vs. paper-based tasks: Are they equivalent? Ergonomics, 51(9), 1352–1375. doi:10.1080/00140130802170387
   Google Scholar
• Oberauer, K., Geiger, S., Fischer, K., & Weidenfeld, A. (2007). Two meanings of “IF”? Individual differences in the interpretation of conditionals. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 790–819. doi:10.1080/17470210600822449
   Google Scholar
• Ridderinkhof, K., van den Wildenberg, W., Segalowitz, S., & Carter, C. (2004). Neurocognitive mechanisms of cognitive control: The role of prefrontal cortex in action selection, response inhibition, performance monitoring, and reward-based learning. Brain and Cognition, 56, 129–140. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.09.016
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. (1957). Models of man, social and rational. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, V. (2000). The task-specific nature of domain-general reasoning. Cognition, 76, 209–268. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00082-2
   Google Scholar
• Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293–315. doi:10.1037//0033295X.90.4.293
   Google Scholar
• Wason, P. (1966). Reasoning. In B. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (pp. 135–151). Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar