Hypothetical Thinking: Dual Processes in Reasoning and Judgement

370 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

The power of representation and interpretation: Doubling statistical reasoning performance with icons and frequentist interpretations of ambiguous numbers (2014, background): “This finding has subsequently been cited as strong evidence against the claim that frequencies constitutes a privileged representational format (e.g., Barbey & Sloman, 2007; Evans, 2007; Girotto & Gonzalez, 2008, 2011; Johnson-Laird, 2006; Over, 2007; Sloman et al., 2003).”
New paradigm psychology of reasoning (2009, background): “This strategy is instructive in itself and complements the direct strategy of investigating whether P(if p then q)¼P(qjp) in people’s judgements (Evans, 2007, has a review of the direct strategy).”
Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory? (2008, background): “Both functions relate to an aspect of reasoning that has received considerable attention in parts of the dual-process literature—hypothetical thinking (Evans, 2003, 2006b, 2007, this volume; Evans and Over, 1996, 2004).”
On the failure of cognitive ability to predict myside and one-sided thinking biases (2008, methodology): “…ability to take multiple perspectives when thinking about a problem are reasoning skills that are deemed of pre-eminent importance (Baron, 1991, 2000; Evans, 2002, 2007; Kuhn, 1999, 2001; Nickerson, 2004; Norris & Ennis, 1989; Paul, 1984, 1987; Perkins, 1995; Toplak & Stanovich, 2002; Wade &…”