title: No interpretation without representation: the role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task.
abstract: The Wason selection task is a tool used to study reasoning about conditional rules. Performance on this task changes systematically when one varies its content, and these content effects have been used to argue that the human cognitive architecture contains a number of domain-specific representation and inference systems, such as social contract algorithms and hazard management systems. Recently, however, Sperber, Cara & Girotto (Sperber, D., Cara, F., & Girotto, V. (1995). Relevance theory explains the selection task. Cognition, 57, 31-95) have proposed that relevance theory can explain performance on the selection task - including all content effects - without invoking inference systems that are content-specialized. Herein, we show that relevance theory alone cannot explain a variety of content effects - effects that were predicted in advance and are parsimoniously explained by theories that invoke domain-specific algorithms for representing and making inferences about (i) social contracts and (ii) reducing risk in hazardous situations. Moreover, although Sperber et al. (1995) were able to use relevance theory to produce some new content effects in other domains, they conducted no experiments involving social exchanges or precautions, and so were unable to determine which - content-specialized algorithms or relevance effects - dominate reasoning when the two conflict. When experiments, reported herein, are constructed so that the different theories predict divergent outcomes, the results support the predictions of social contract theory and hazard management theory, indicating that these inference systems override content-general relevance factors. The fact that social contract and hazard management algorithms provide better explanations for performance in their respective domains does not mean that the content-general logical procedures posited by relevance theory do not exist, or that relevance effects never occur. It does mean, however, that one needs a principled way of explaining which effects will dominate when a set of inputs activate more than one reasoning system. We propose the principle of pre-emptive specificity - that the human cognitive architecture should be designed so that more specialized inference systems pre-empt more general ones whenever the stimuli centrally fit the input conditions of the more specialized system. This principle follows from evolutionary and computational considerations that are common to both relevance theory and the ecological rationality approach.
authors.affiliation: Max-Planck-Institute for Human Development, Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Lentzeallee 94, D-14195, Berlin, Germany. fiddick@mpib.berlin.mpg.de
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Fiddick
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Cosmides
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Tooby
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000465:Algorithms; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008128:Logic; D008297:Male; D011340:Problem Solving; D012919:Social Behavior; D012938:Social Perception; D013334:Students / Q000523:psychology