Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T21:04:45.357Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Oaksford & Chater's theory of reasoning: High prior, lower posterior plausibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Klaus Oberauer
Klaus Oberauer
Affiliation:
Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 ITU, United Kingdom. k.oberauer@bristol.ac.ukhttp://psychology.psy.bris.ac.uk/people/klausoberauer.htm
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Oaksford & Chater (O&C) subscribe to the view that a conditional expresses a high conditional probability of the consequent, given the antecedent, but they model conditionals as expressing a dependency between antecedent and consequent. Therefore, their model is inconsistent with their theoretical commitment. The model is also inconsistent with some findings on how people interpret conditionals and how they reason from them.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 95 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Evans, J. St. B. T. & Handley, S. J. (1999) The role of negation in conditional inference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 52A:739–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markovits, H. & Barrouillet, P. (2002) The development of conditional reasoning: A mental model account. Developmental Review 22:5–36.Google Scholar
Oaksford, M. & Chater, N. (2007) Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Oaksford, M., Chater, N. & Larkin, J. (2000) Probabilities and polarity biases in conditional inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 26:883–89.Google Scholar
Oberauer, K. (2006) Reasoning with conditionals: A test of formal models of four theories. Cognitive Psychology 53:238–83.Google Scholar
Oberauer, K., Weidenfeld, A. & Fischer, K. (2007) What makes us believe a conditional? The roles of covariation and causality. Thinking and Reasoning 13:340–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberauer, K., Weidenfeld, A. & Hörnig, R. (2004) Logical reasoning and probabilities: A comprehensive test of Oaksford and Chater (2001) Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 11:521–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed