IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0094223.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intuitive Logic Revisited: New Data and a Bayesian Mixed Model Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Henrik Singmann
  • Karl Christoph Klauer
  • David Kellen

Abstract

Recent research on syllogistic reasoning suggests that the logical status (valid vs. invalid) of even difficult syllogisms can be intuitively detected via differences in conceptual fluency between logically valid and invalid syllogisms when participants are asked to rate how much they like a conclusion following from a syllogism (Morsanyi & Handley, 2012). These claims of an intuitive logic are at odds with most theories on syllogistic reasoning which posit that detecting the logical status of difficult syllogisms requires effortful and deliberate cognitive processes. We present new data replicating the effects reported by Morsanyi and Handley, but show that this effect is eliminated when controlling for a possible confound in terms of conclusion content. Additionally, we reanalyze three studies () without this confound with a Bayesian mixed model meta-analysis (i.e., controlling for participant and item effects) which provides evidence for the null-hypothesis and against Morsanyi and Handley's claim.

Suggested Citation

  • Henrik Singmann & Karl Christoph Klauer & David Kellen, 2014. "Intuitive Logic Revisited: New Data and a Bayesian Mixed Model Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-11, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0094223
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094223
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0094223
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0094223&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0094223?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hiroko Nakamura & Jun Kawaguchi, 2016. "People Like Logical Truth: Testing the Intuitive Detection of Logical Value in Basic Propositions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-21, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0094223. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.