Advertisement

Memory & Cognition

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 96–106 | Cite as

Co-reference and reasoning

  • Clare R. Walsh
  • P. N. Johnson-Laird
Article
  • 193 Downloads

Abstract

Co-reference occurs when two or more noun phrases refer to the same individual, as in the following inferential problem: Mark is kneeling by the fire or he is looking at the TV but not both. / Mark is kneeling by the fire. / Is he looking at the TV? In three experiments, we compared co-referential reasoning problems with problems referring to different individuals. Experiment 1 showed that co-reference improves accuracy. In Experiment 2, we replicated that finding and showed that co-reference speeds up both reading and inference. Experiment 3 showed that the effects of co-reference are greatest when the premises and the conclusion share co-referents. These effects led the participants to make illusory inferences—that is, to draw systematically invalid conclusions. The results are discussed in terms of the mental model theory of reasoning.

Keywords

Mental Model Wilcoxon Test Noun Phrase Reading Time Explicit Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Supplementary material

Walsh-MC-2004a.zip (6 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 340 KB.

References

  1. Barres, P. E., &Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2003). On imagining what is true (and what is false).Thinking & Reasoning,9, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bouquet, P., & Warglien, M. (1999). Mental models and local models semantics: The problem of information integration. InProceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Science (pp. 169–178). Siena, Italy.Google Scholar
  3. Braine, M. D. S., &O’Brien, D. P. (1998).Mental logic. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Garnham, A., Oakhill, J., &Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1982). Referential continuity and the coherence of discourse.Cognition,11, 29–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990).Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  6. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983).Mental models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson-Laird, P. N., &Byrne, R. M. J. (1991).Deduction. Hove, U.K.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson-Laird, P. N., &Byrne, R. M. J. (2002). Conditionals: A theory of meaning, pragmatics and inferences.Psychological Review,109, 646–678.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson-Laird, P. N., &Savary, F. (1996). Illusory inference about probabilities.Psychologica,93, 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Johnson-Laird, P. N., &Savary, F. (1999). Illusory inferences: A novel class of erroneous deductions.Cognition,71, 191–229.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Radvansky, G. A., Spieler, D. H., &Zacks, R. T. (1993). Mental model organization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 95–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rips, L. J. (1994).The psychology of proof. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Schaeken, W., Johnson-Laird, P. N., Byrne, R. M. J., &D’Ydewalle, G. (1995). A comparison of conditional and disjunctive inferences: A case study of the mental model theory of reasoning.Psychologica Belgica,35, 57–70.Google Scholar
  14. Shastri, L., &Ajjanagadde, V. (1993). From simple associations to systematic reasoning: A connectionist representation of rules, variables and dynamic bindings using temporal synchrony.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,16, 417–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Zwaan, R. A., &Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory.Psychological Bulletin,123, 162–185.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Princeton UniversityPrinceton
  2. 2.Department of Cognitive and Linguistic SciencesBrown UniversityProvidence

Personalised recommendations