Deduction with Euler Circles: Diagrams That Hurt

  • Dustin P. Calvillo
  • Krista DeLeeuw
  • Russell Revlin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4045)

Abstract

Two studies evaluated the effectiveness of Euler circles in aiding participants in drawing conclusions to deductive reasoning problems. The problems were the ones that typically cause reasoners the most difficulty because their prior beliefs about conclusions interfere with their judgments of deductive validity. The use Euler circles reliably contributed to reasoners’ inability to solve the problems. This pattern was shown for both young, university students and elderly retired people.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Calvillo, D.P., Revlin, R.: The role of similarity in deductive categorical inference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. Special Issue: Memory strength and recency judgments 12, 938–944 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. Ekstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, H.H.: Kit of factorreferencedcognitivetests, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ (1976)Google Scholar
  3. Evans, J.St.B.T., Newstead, S.E., Byrne, R.M.J.: Human Reasoning: The psychology of deduction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hove (1993)Google Scholar
  4. Evans, J.St.B.T.: Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1989)Google Scholar
  5. Evans, J.St.B.T., Barston, J.L., Pollard, P.: On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning. Memory & Cognition 11, 295–306 (1983)Google Scholar
  6. Henle, M.: On the relation between logic and thinking. Psychological Review 69, 366–378 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Johnson-Laird, P.N.: Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of lanuage, inference and consciousness. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983)Google Scholar
  8. Johnson-Laird, P.N., Byrne, R.M.J.: Deduction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1991)Google Scholar
  9. Klauer, K.C., Musch, J., Naumer, B.: On the belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. Psychological Review 107, 852–884 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Newell, A.: Reasoning, problem solving and decision processes: The problem space as a fundamental category. In: Nickerson, R. (ed.) Attention and Performance, vol. 8, Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1981)Google Scholar
  11. Revlin, R., Leirer, V.O.: The effects of personal biases on syllogistic reasoning: Rational decisions from personalized representations. In: Revlin, R., Mayer, R.E. (eds.) Human reasoning, Winston, Washington (1978)Google Scholar
  12. Revlin, R., Leirer, V.O., Yopp, H., Yopp, R.: The belief-bias effect in formal reasoning: The influence of knowledge on logic. Memory & Cognition 8, 584–592 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Revlis, R.: Two models of syllogistic reasoning: Feature selection and conversion. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14, 180–195 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rips, L.: The Psychology of Proof. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Rizzo, A., Palmonari, M.: The mediating role of artifacts in deductive reasoning. In: The 2005 Cognitive Science Society, Stresa, Italy (2005)Google Scholar
  16. Salthouse, T.A., Mitchell, D.R.: Effects of age and naturally occurring experience on spatial visualization performance. Developmental Psychology 26, 845–854 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sloman, S.A.: Categorical inference is not a tree: The myth of inheritance hierarchies. Cognitive Psychology 35, 1–33 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wilkins, M.C.: The effect of changed material on the ability to do formal syllogistic reasoning. Archives of Psychology 102, 1–83 (1928)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dustin P. Calvillo
    • 1
  • Krista DeLeeuw
    • 1
  • Russell Revlin
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations