Individual differences in working memory capacity and resistance to belief bias in syllogistic reasoning.

نویسندگان

  • Matthew K Robison
  • Nash Unsworth
چکیده

In two experiments, we investigated the possibility that individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) would provide resistance to belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. In Experiment 1 (N = 157), participants showed a belief bias effect in that they had longer response times and decreased accuracy on syllogisms with conflict between the validity and believability of the conclusion than on syllogisms with no such conflict. However, this effect did not differ as a function of individual differences in WMC. Experiment 2 (N = 122) replicated this effect with the addition of decontextualized (i.e., nonsense) syllogisms as a different means of measuring the magnitude of the belief bias effect. Although individual differences in WMC and fluid intelligence were related to better reasoning overall, the magnitude of the belief bias effect was not smaller for participants with greater WMC. The present study offers two novel findings: (a) The belief bias effect is independent of individual differences in WMC and fluid intelligence, and (b) resolving conflict in verbal reasoning is not a type of conflict resolution that correlates with individual differences in WMC, further establishing boundary conditions for the role of WMC in human cognitive processes.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The SDT model of belief bias: complexity, time, and cognitive ability mediate the effects of believability.

When people evaluate conclusions, they are often influenced by prior beliefs. Prevalent theories claim that belief bias affects the quality of syllogistic reasoning. However, recent work by Dube, Rotello, and Heit (2010) has suggested that belief bias may be a simple response bias. In Experiment 1, receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that believability affected accuracy for comp...

متن کامل

Individual Differences in Rational Thinking Time

Individual difference studies suggest that reasoners highest in cognitive capacity favor analytic, normative responses over fallacious, heuristic responses. The present study complemented reasoning accuracy with timing data to obtain an indication of the nature of the reasoning process underlying the response selection. A total of 199 participants were presented with a measure of working memory...

متن کامل

Dual Processing in Reasoning

Human reasoning has been characterized as an interplay between an automatic belief-based system and a demanding logic-based reasoning system. The present study tested a fundamental claim about the nature of individual differences in reasoning and the processing demands of both systems. Participants varying in working memory capacity performed a reasoning task while their executive resources wer...

متن کامل

Two Systems but One Reasoner

Human reasoning has been characterized as an interplay between an automatic belief-based system and a demanding logic-based reasoning system. The present study tested a fundamental claim about the nature of individual differences in reasoning and the processing demands of both systems. Participants varying in working memory capacity performed a reasoning task while their executive resources wer...

متن کامل

Neural correlates of the belief-bias effect in syllogistic reasoning: an event-related potential study.

This study investigated electrophysiological correlates of belief-bias effects in syllogistic reasoning. Event-related brain potentials were recorded for minor premises with which participants were required to draw a logic conclusion during three conditions: the inhibitory belief condition (IBC, the belief is inhibitory to the logical task), the facilitatory belief condition (FBC, the belief is...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Quarterly journal of experimental psychology

دوره 70 8  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2017