A dual-process specification of causal conditional reasoning

136 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.

On the resolution of conflict in dual process theories of reasoning (2007, background): “Advocates of this hypothesis can allow that analytic reasoning does not need to be abstract or logical, and may be actively involved in domain-specific and content-laden forms of reasoning (Verschueren et al., 2005).”
Questions and challenges for the new psychology of reasoning (2012, background): “Recent models also recognise that beliefs and context can influence Type 2 as well as Type 1 processing (Evans et al., 2001; Klauer et al., 2000; Verschueren et al., 2005; Weidenfeld, Oberauer, & Hornig, 2005).”
Reasoning under time pressure. A study of causal conditional inference. (2009, methodology): “It has been shown that DA and AC rates are strongly linked to the degree of belief that people hold that the antecedent will be true when the consequent holds (q to p link) just as MP and MT are related to the belief in the link from p to q (for some example studies, see Cummins et al., 1991; Dieuss”
Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. (2008, background): “However, it may be unwise to define System 2 as being abstract and decontextualized if we also want to retain its description as slow, sequential, explicit, and rule-based because none of these characteristics may be limited to abstract forms of reasoning (Sloman 2002, Verschueren et al. 2005).”