Arbitrating norms for reasoning tasks

The psychology of reasoning uses norms to categorize responses tasks as correct or incorrect in order interpret the and compare them across tasks. This raises arbitration problem: any number can be used evaluate task there doesn’t seem a principled way arbitrate among them. Elqayam Evans have argued that this problem is insoluble, so they call for dispense with entirely. Alternatively, Stupple Ball must used, but should solved by favouring are sensitive context, constraints, goals human reasoning. In paper, I argue design requires selection indifferent factors influence tasks—which aren’t knowable during phase, before has been given subjects. Moreover, easily dissolved: well-designed will contain instructions implicitly explicitly specify single determinate norm, which specifies what would count solution task—independently Finally, discouraging use these priori may impair novel