Abstract
Syllogistic reasoning, in which people identify conclusions from quantified premise pairs, remains a benchmark task whose patterns of data must be accounted for by general theories of deductive reasoning. However, psychologists have confined themselves to administering only the 64 premise pairs historically identified by Aristotle. By utilizing all combinations of negations, the present article identifies an expanded set of 576 premise pairs and gives the valid conclusions that they support. Many of these have interesting properties, and the identification of predictions and their verification will be an important next step for all proponents of such theories.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bacon, A., Handley, S. J., &Newstead, S. E. (2005). Verbal and spatial strategies in reasoning. In M. J. Roberts & E. J. Newton (Eds.),Methods of thought: Individual differences in reasoning strategies (pp. 81–105). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Chater, N., &Oaksford, M. (1999). The probability heuristics model of syllogistic reasoning.Cognitive Psychology,38, 191–258.
Erickson, J. R. (1974). A set analysis theory of behavior in formal syllogistic reasoning tasks. In R. L. Solso (Ed.),Theories in cognitive psychology: The Loyola symposium (pp. 305–329). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Espino, O., Santamaria, C., &Garcia-Madruga, J. A. (2000). Figure and difficulty in syllogistic reasoning.Current Psychology of Cognition,19, 417–428.
Evans, J. S. B. T., Handley, S. J., Harper, C. N. J., &Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1999). Reasoning about necessity and possibility: A test of the mental model theory of deduction.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 1495–1513.
Evans, J. S. B. T., Legrenzi, P., &Girotto, V. (1999). The influence of linguistic form on reasoning: The case of matching bias.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,52A, 185–216.
Evans, J. S. B. T., &Lynch, J. S. (1973). Matching bias in the selection task.British Journal of Psychology,64, 391–397.
Evans, J. S. B. T., Newstead, S. E., &Byrne, R. M. J. (1993).Human reasoning: The psychology of deduction. Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Ford, M. (1995). Two modes of mental representation and problem solution in syllogistic reasoning.Cognition,54, 1–71.
Gilhooly, K. J. (2005). Working memory and strategies in reasoning. In M. J. Roberts & E. J. Newton (Eds.),Methods of thought: Individual differences in reasoning strategies (pp. 57–80). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Gilhooly, K. J., Logie, R. H., Wetherick, N. E., &Wynn, V. (1993). Working memory and strategies in syllogistic-reasoning tasks.Memory & Cognition,21, 115–124.
Hardman, D. K. (1996). Mental models: The revised theory brings new problems.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,19, 542–543.
Hardman, D. K., &Payne, S. J. (1995). Problem difficulty and response format in syllogistic reasoning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,48A, 945–975.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., &Byrne, R. M. J. (1991).Deduction. Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
MacLeod, C. M., Hunt, E. B., &Mathews, N. N. (1978). Individual differences in the verification of sentence-picture relationships.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,17, 493–507.
Polk, T. A., &Newell, A. (1995). Deduction as verbal reasoning.Psychological Review,102, 533–566.
Revlis, R. (1975). Syllogistic reasoning: Logical decisions from a complex database. In R. J. Falmagne (Ed.),Reasoning: Representation and process in children and adults (pp. 93–133). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rips, L. J. (1994).The psychology of proof. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Roberts, M. J. (2002). The elusive matching bias effect in the disjunctive selection task.Experimental Psychology,49, 89–97.
Roberts, M. J. (2004). Heuristics in reasoning: Making deduction simple. In R. J. Sternberg & J. P. Leighton (Eds.),The nature of reasoning (pp. 234–272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roberts, M. J. (2006). Falsification and mental models: It depends on the task. In W. Schaeken, A. Vandierendonck, & G. d’Ydewalle (Eds.),The mental models theory of reasoning: Refinement and extensions (pp. 85–113). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Roberts, M. J., Newstead, S. E., &Griggs, R. A. (2001). Quantifier interpretation and syllogistic reasoning.Thinking & Reasoning,7, 173–204.
Roberts, M. J., &Sykes, E. D. A. (2005). Categorical reasoning from multiple diagrams.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,58A, 333–376.
Stanovich, K. E., &West, R. F. (1998). Cognitive ability and variation in selection task performance.Thinking & Reasoning,4, 193–231.
Stenning, K. (2002).Seeing reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stenning, K., &Yule, P. (1997). Image and language in human reasoning: A syllogistic illustration.Cognitive Psychology,34, 109–159.
Wason, P. C. (1972). In real life, negatives are false.Logique et Analyse,57–58, 19–38.
Wetherick, N. E., &Gilhooly, K. J. (1995). “Atmosphere,” matching, and logic in syllogistic reasoning.Current Psychology,14, 169–178.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roberts, M.J. Expanding the universe of categorical syllogisms: A challenge for reasoning researchers. Behavior Research Methods 37, 560–580 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192727
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192727