The role of logical reasoning, belief-content and the type of inference in belief revision
Prior research shows mixed findings regarding individuals’ belief-revision strategies. The current research is aimed to test (a) whether individuals’ reasoning across abstract vs real-world content shows similarity, and (b) whether individuals’ syllogistic reasoning predicts their belief-revision strategies. Experiment 1, testing 76 participants (50 females), provides evidence for the similarity in reasoning across abstract and real-world content (p < .05). In Experiment 2, testing 84 participants (58 females), we find no significant effect of reasoning performance on belief-revision strategies (p > .05). Individuals seem to revise the conditional statement in the AC and DA inferences, especially when the content poses a threat. In contrast, individuals prefer to revise the categorical premise in the MT inferences, especially when the content poses a threat. These findings suggest that in the face of inconsistency individuals’ decision about which of their prior beliefs they should revise is influenced by the structure and content of the belief-contravening problem rather than their reasoning ability.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Literature review
- 3.Methods
- 3.1Experiment 1
- 3.1.1Participants
- 3.1.2Measures
- Logical reasoning task with abstract content
- Logical reasoning task with real-world/concrete content
- 3.1.3Procedure
- 3.1.4Coding
- 3.1.5Results
- Accuracy in the logical reasoning task with abstract content
- Accuracy in the logical reasoning task with real-world/concrete content
- Comparison of individuals’ reasoning performance between abstract and real-world content
- 3.1.6Discussion
- 3.2Experiment 2
- 3.2.1Participants
- 3.2.2Measures
- Logical reasoning task with abstract content
- Belief revision task
- 3.2.3Procedure
- 3.2.4Coding
- 3.2.5Results
- Performance in the logical reasoning task with abstract content
- Individuals’ reasoning strategies in belief revision task
- 3.2.6Discussion
- 4.Discussion
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
- Author queries
-
References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.