The psychology of verbal reasoning initially compared performance with classical logic. In the last 25 years, a new paradigm has arisen, which focuses on knowledge-rich reasoning for communication and persuasion and is typically modeled using Bayesian probability theory rather than logic. This paradigm provides a new perspective on argumentation, explaining the rational persuasiveness of arguments that are logical fallacies. It also helps explain how and why people stray from logic when given deductive reasoning tasks. What appear to be erroneous responses, when compared against logic, often turn out to be rationally justified when seen in the richer rational framework of the new paradigm. Moreover, the same approach extends naturally to inductive reasoning tasks, in which people extrapolate beyond the data they are given and logic does not readily apply. We outline links between social and individual reasoning and set recent developments in the psychology of reasoning in the wider context of Bayesian cognitive science.

中文翻译：

---

推理心理学的新范式。

言语推理心理学最初将表演与古典逻辑进行了比较。在过去的25年中，出现了一个新的范式，其重点是用于交流和说服力的知识丰富的推理，并且通常使用贝叶斯概率论而非逻辑来建模。这种范式为论证提供了新的视角，解释了逻辑谬论的论证的合理说服力。它还有助于解释人们在执行演绎推理任务时如何以及为什么会偏离逻辑。当与逻辑比较时，看似错误的响应通常在新范式的更丰富的理性框架中得以证明是合理合理的。而且，相同的方法自然会扩展到归纳推理任务，在这种情况下，人们推断出的数据超出了他们所提供的数据，因此逻辑不容易应用。我们概述了社会推理与个人推理之间的联系，并在贝叶斯认知科学的更广泛的背景下设定了推理心理学的最新发展。