Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:44:30.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Logic and Decision Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2010

David E. Over
Affiliation:
University of Sunderland
S. Barry Cooper
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
John K. Truss
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access

Summary

Abstract

There are largely separate psychological literatures on logical reasoning and on decision making. This division has limited psychological theories in both areas, and particularly held up the study of ordinary deductive reasoning. People do not ordinarily reason from a restricted set of arbitrary assumptions taken, in effect, to be certainly true. Much more often, they try to perform inferences from all their relevant beliefs, holding few of these with absolute confidence, or they perform inferences from statements made to them, and treat few of these as absolutely reliable. They recognise that their premises have some degree of probability or uncertainty, and they consequently have more or less confidence in them. This affects their confidence in, and probability judgements about, their conclusions. People also face the problem of getting evidence to assess how probable or uncertain their premises are, and this calls for further probability judgements, as well as utility judgements and decision making. Much better understanding of people's deductive reasoning in realistic contexts will be achieved by integrating research on it with research on decision making and probability and utility judgments.

Introduction

There has been extensive psychological research on people's ability at deductive reasoning (Evans, Newstead, Byrne, 1993), but this field has been largely separate from psychological research on human probability judgements and decision making (Baron, 1994). There have been some attempts recently to integrate these fields (Evans and Over, 1996a), but the division between them has limited psychological theories in both, and has been especially harmful to the study of ordinary logical reasoning.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×