Abstract

A dual-source model of probabilistic conditional inference is proposed. According to the model, inferences are based on 2 sources of evidence: logical form and prior knowledge. Logical form is a decontextualized source of evidence, whereas prior knowledge is activated by the contents of the conditional rule. In Experiments 1 to 3, manipulations of perceived sufficiency and necessity mapped on the parameters quantifying prior knowledge. Emphasizing rule validity increased the weight given to form-based evidence relative to knowledge-based evidence (Experiment 1). Manipulating rule form (only-if vs. if-then) had a focused effect on the parameters quantifying form-based evidence (Experiment 3). The model also provides a parsimonious description of data from the so-called negations paradigm and adequately accounts for polarity bias in that paradigm (Experiment 4). Relationships to alternative conceptualizations of conditional inference are discussed.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.