Abstract

It is well established that beliefs provide powerful cues that influence reasoning. Over the last decade research has revealed that judgments based upon logical structure may also pre-empt deliberative reasoning. Evidence for ‘intuitive logic’ has been claimed using a range of measures (i.e. confidence ratings or latency of response on conflict problems). However, it is unclear how well such measures genuinely reflect logical intuition. In this paper we introduce a new method designed to test for evidence of intuitive logic. In two experiments participants were asked to make random judgments about the logical validity of a series of simple and complex syllogistic arguments. For simple arguments there was an effect of logical validity on random responding, which was absent for complex arguments. These findings provide a novel demonstration that people are intuitively sensitive to logical structure.

摘要

众所周知，信念提供了影响推理的强大线索。过去十年的研究表明，基于逻辑结构的判断也可能先于审慎推理。“直觉逻辑”的证据已使用一系列措施（即信心等级或对冲突问题的反应延迟）进行了声明。然而，目前尚不清楚这些措施在多大程度上真正反映了逻辑直觉。在本文中，我们介绍了一种旨在测试直观逻辑证据的新方法。在两个实验中，参与者被要求对一系列简单和复杂的三段论论证的逻辑有效性做出随机判断。对于简单的论点，逻辑有效性对随机响应有影响，而对于复杂的论点则没有。