Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHowarth, S
dc.contributor.authorHandley, S
dc.contributor.authorWalsh, Clare
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-30T09:39:38Z
dc.date.available2018-11-30T09:39:38Z
dc.date.issued2019-10-02
dc.identifier.issn1354-6783
dc.identifier.issn1464-0708
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/12954
dc.description.abstract

© 2018, © 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. The Default Interventionist account suggests that by default, we often generate belief-based responses when reasoning and find it difficult to draw the logical inference. Recent research, however, shows that in some instances belief judgments take longer, are more prone to error and are more affected by cognitive load. One interpretation is that some logical inferences are available automatically and require intervention in order to respond according to beliefs. In two experiments, we investigate the effortful nature of belief judgments and the automaticity of logical inferences by increasing the inhibitory demands of the task. Participants were instructed to judge conclusion validity, believability and either font colour or font style, to increase the number of competing responses. Results showed that conflict more strongly affects judgments of believability than validity and when inhibitory demands are increased, the validity of an argument impacts more on belief judgments. These findings align with the new Parallel Processing model of belief bias.

dc.format.extent416-448
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis (Routledge)
dc.subjectBelief bias
dc.subjectintuitive logic
dc.subjectconditional reasoning
dc.subjectdual process theory
dc.subjectinhibition
dc.subjectparallel processing
dc.titleThe logic sense: exploring the role of executive functioning in belief and logic-based judgments
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000486293900002&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue4
plymouth.volume25
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalThinking and Reasoning
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/13546783.2018.1523808
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Psychology
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience MANUAL
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour (CBCB)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour (CBCB)/Cognition
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-09-09
dc.rights.embargodate2019-10-25
dc.identifier.eissn1464-0708
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1080/13546783.2018.1523808
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV