Advertisement

Updating Context in the Equation: An Experimental Argument with Eye Tracking

  • Jean Baratgin
  • Brian Ocak
  • Hamid Bessaa
  • Jean-Louis Stilgenbauer
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 456)

Abstract

The Bayesian model was recently proposed as a normative reference for psychology studies in deductive reasoning. This new paradigm supports that individuals evaluate the probability of an indicative conditional if A then C in the natural language as the conditional probability \(P(\textit{C given A})\) (P(C|A) according to Bayes’ rule). In this paper, we show applying an eye-tracking methodology that if the cognitive process for both probability assessments (\(P(\textit{if A then C})\) and P(C|A)) is really identical, it actually doesn’t match the traditional focusing situation of revision corresponding to Bayes’ rule (change of reference class in a static universe). Individuals appear to revise their probability as if the universe was evolving. They use a minimal rule in mentally removing the elements of the worlds that are not A. This situation, called updating, actually seems to be the natural frame for individuals to evaluate the probability of indicative conditional and the conditional probability.

Keywords

Equation Conditional probability Focusing Updating Eye-tracking methodology 

References

  1. 1.
    Baratgin J (2009) Updating our beliefs about inconsistency: the Monty-Hall case. Math Soc Sci 57:67–95MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baratgin J (2015) Rationality, the Bayesian standpoint, and the Monty-Hall problem. Front Psychol 6:1168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baratgin J (in press) Le raisonnement humain: une approche finettienne [Human reasoning: A Finettian approach]. Hermann, ParisGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baratgin J, Douven I, St Evans JBT, Oaksford M, Over D, Polytzer G, (2015) The new paradigm and mental models. Trends Cogn Sci 19:547–548Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baratgin J, Over DE, Politzer G (2013) Uncertainty and the de Finetti tables. Think Reason 19:308–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baratgin J, Over DE, Politzer G (2014) New psychological paradigm for conditionals and general de Finetti tables. Mind Lang 29:73–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baratgin J, Politzer G (2006) Is the mind Bayesian? The case for agnosticism. Mind Soc 5:1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baratgin J, Politzer G (2007) The psychology of dynamic probability judgment: order effect, normative theories and experimental methodology. Mind Soc 6:53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baratgin J, Politzer G (2010) Updating: a psychologically basic situation of probability revision. Think Reason 16:253–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baratgin J, Politzer G (2016) Logic, probability and inference: a methodology for a new paradigm. In: Macchi L, Bagassi M, Viale R (eds) Cognitive unconscious and human rationality. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baratgin J, Politzer G, Over DE, Takahashi T (2016) The psychology of uncertainty and three-valued truth tables. MSGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Coletti G, Scozzafava G (2002) Probabilistic logic in a coherent setting. Kluwer, DordrechtCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cruz N, Oberauer K (2014) Comparing the meanings of “if” and “all”. Mem Cogn 42:1345–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cruz N, Baratgin J, Oaksford M, Over DE (2015) Bayesian reasoning with ifs and ands and ors. Front Psychol 6:192Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Finetti B (1957) L’informazione, il ragionamento, linconscio nei rapporti con la previsione [The information, reasoning, the unconscious in relations with the prediction]. Lindustria 2:3–27Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Finetti B (1964) Foresight: Its logical laws, its subjective sources. In: Kyburg H, Smokier, HE (eds) Studies in subjective probability. Wiley, New York (Original work published 1937)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    de Finetti B (1980) Probabilità [probability]. Enciclopedia X:1146–1187). Einaudi, TorinoGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    de Finetti B (1995) The logic of probability. Philos Stud 77:181–190 (Original work published 1936)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Douven I (2008) Kaufmann on the probabilities of conditionals. J Philos Logic 37:259–266MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Douven I, Verbrugge S (2010) The adams family. Cognition 117:302–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Douven I, Verbrugge S (2013) The probabilities of conditionals revisited. Cogn Sci 117:302–318Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dubois D, Prade H (1992) Evidence, knowledge, and belief functions. Int J Approx Reason 6:295–319MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Elqayam S, Over DE (2013) New paradigm psychology of reasoning: An introduction to the special issue edited by Elqayam, Bonnefon, and Over. Think Reason 19:249–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Evans JSBT, Handley SJ, Neilens H, Over DE (2007) Thinking about conditionals: a study of individual differences. Mem Cogn 35:1759–1771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Evans JSBT, Handley SJ, Over DE (2003) Conditionals and conditional probability. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 29:321–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Edgington D (1995) On conditionals. Mind 104:235–329MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fugard JB, Pfeifer N, Mayerhofer B, Kleiter GD (2011) How people interpret conditionals: Shifts toward conditional event. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 37:635–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jeffrey R (1991) Matter-of-fact conditionals. PAS (suppl) 65:161–183Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Katsuno A, Mendelzon A (1992) On the difference between updating a knowledge base and revising it. In: Gärdenfors P (ed) Belief revision. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kaufmann S, Winston E, Zutty D (2004a) Local and global interpretations of conditionals. Eighth Symposium on Logic and Language (LOLA 8), Debrecen, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kaufmann S (2004b) Conditioning against the grain: abduction and indicative conditionals. J Philos Logic 33:583–606MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kern-Isberner G (2001) Revising and updating probabilistic beliefs. In: Williams MA, Rott H (eds) Frontiers in Belief Revision. Kluwer Academic, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Khoo J (2016) Probabilities of conditionals in context. Linguist Philos 39:1–43MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Korzukhin T (2016) Probabilities of conditionals in context. a comment on Khoo (2016). Linguist Philos 39:45–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Manktelow KI, Over DE, Elqayam S (2011) Paradigms shift: Jonathan Evans and the science of reason. In: Manktelow KI, Over DE, Elqayam S (eds) The science of reason: A festschrift for J. St. B. T. Evans. Psychology Press, HoveGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Oberauer K, Wilhelm O (2003) The meaning(s) of conditionals: Conditional probabilities, mental models and personal utilities. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 29:680–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Olsen NS, Singmann H, Klauer C (in press) The Relevance Effect and Conditionals. CognGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Over DE (2009) New paradigm psychology of reasoning. Think Reason 15:431–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Over DE, Baratgin J (2016) The ‘defective’ truth table: Its past, present, and future. In: Lucas E, Galbraith N, Over DE (eds) The thinking mind: the use of thinking in everyday life. Psychology Press, AlbertonGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Over DE, Hadjichristidis C, St Evans JBT, Handley SJ, Sloman SA (2007) The probability of causal conditionals. Cogn Psychol 54:62–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Pfeifer N, Kleiter GD (2006) Inference in conditional probability logic. Kybernetika 42:391–404MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pfeifer N, Kleiter GD (2009) Framing human inference by coherence based probability logic. J Appl Log 7:206–217MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pfeifer N, Kleiter GD (2010) The conditional in mental probability logic. In: Oaksford M, Chater N (eds) Cognition and conditionals: Probability and logic in human thinking. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pfeifer N, Kleiter GD (2011) Uncertain deductive reasoning. In: Manktelow KI, Over DE, Elqayam S (eds) The science of reason: A festschrift for J. St. B. T. Evans. Psychology Press, HoveGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Politzer G (in press). Deductive reasoning under uncertainty: A water tank analogy. ErkenntnisGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Politzer G, Baratgin J (2016) Deductive schemas with uncertain premises using qualitative probability expressions. Think Reason 22:78–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Politzer G, Over DE, Baratgin J (2010) Betting on conditionals. Think Reason 16:172–1777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Singmann H, Klauer KC, Over DE (2014) New normative standards of conditional reasoning and the dual-source model. Front Psychol 5:316Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Walliser B, Zwirn D (2002) Can Bayes rule be justified by cognitive rationality principles? Theory Decis 53:95–135MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Walliser B, Zwirn D (2011) Change rules for hierarchical beliefs. Int J Approx Reason 52:166–183MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Baratgin
    • 1
    • 2
  • Brian Ocak
    • 1
    • 3
  • Hamid Bessaa
    • 1
  • Jean-Louis Stilgenbauer
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire CHArtUniversité Paris 8 & EPHE, Site Paris-EPHEParisFrance
  2. 2.Institut Jean Nicod (École Normale Supérieure)ParisFrance
  3. 3.Université de Franche-ComtéBesançonFrance

Personalised recommendations