Abstract
Current theories of human deductive reasoning make different claims about the representation of logical statements in memory. Syntactically-based theories claim that abstract logical forms are represented veridically in memory, separate from content, whereas semantic theories propose that naive reasoners represent combinations of possibilities that are based on the content of statements. We tested these predictions in two experiments in which participants had to recall and recognize statements of different logical forms. Results indicate that memory for logical form is not veridical, thus failing to support the syntactic view. In particular, results suggest that naive participants tend, whenever possible, to represent only a single possibility for a statement of any logical form. These findings are consistent with semantic theories of human deductive reasoning and have significant implications for all theories of reasoning.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
