Abstract
Ss assessed the validity of syllogisms varying in affective loading, quantification, and validity. Syllogisms with existential conclusions resulted in more errors than syllogisms with universal conclusions, and more invalid syllogisms were incorrectly accepted than were valid ones incorrectly rejected. This difference was greatest for existential arguments with positive affect.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Feather, N. J. Acceptance and rejection of arguments in relation to attitude strength, critical ability and intolerance of inconsistency. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1964, 69, 127–136.
Janis, I. L., & Frick, F. The relationship between attitudes towards conclusions and errors in judging logical validity of syllogisms. J. exp. Psychol., 1943, 33, 73–77.
Lefford, A. The influence of emotional subject matter on logical reasoning. J. gen. Psychol., 1946, 34, 127–151.
Morgan, J. J. B., & Morton, I. F. The distortion of syllogistic reasoning produced by personal conviction. J. soc. Psychol., 1944, 20, 39–59.
Rorer, L. G. The great response style myth. Psychol. Bull., 1965, 63, 129–158.
Thistlewaite, D. L. Attitude and structure as factors in the distortion of reasoning. J. abnorm. soc. Psychol., 1950, 45, 442–458.
Thouless, R. M. Effect of prejudice on reasoning. Brit. J. Psychol., 1959, 50, 289–293.
Woodworth, R. S., & Sells, B. An atmosphere effect in formal syllogistic reasoning. J. exp. Psychol., 1935, 18, 451–460.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Note
1. The present study was conducted while the Senior Author held Ontario Mental Health Foundation Grant No. 93.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaufmann, H., Goldstein, S. The effects of emotional value of conclusions upon distortion in syllogistic reasoning. Psychon Sci 7, 367–368 (1967). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03331127
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03331127