Working memory, metacognitive uncertainty, and belief bias in syllogistic reasoning.
Studies of syllogistic reasoning have shown that the size of the belief bias effect varies with manipulations of logical validity and problem form. This paper presents a mental models-based account, which explains these findings in terms of variations in the working-memory demands of different problem types. We propose that belief bias may reflect the use of a heuristic that is applied when a threshold of uncertainty in one's processing--attributable to working-memory overload--is exceeded during reasoning. Three experiments are reported, which tested predictions deriving from this account. In Experiment 1, conclusions of neutral believability were presented for evaluation, and a predicted dissociation was observed in confidence ratings for responses to valid and invalid arguments, with participants being more confident in the former. In Experiment 2, an attempt to manipulate working-memory loads indirectly by varying syllogistic figure failed to produce predicted effects upon the size of the belief bias effect. It is argued that the employment of a conclusion evaluation methodology minimized the effect of the figural manipulation in this experiment. In Experiment 3, participants' articulatory and spatial recall capacities were calibrated as a direct test of working-memory involvement in belief bias. Predicted differences in the pattern of belief bias observed between high and low spatial recall groups supported the view that limited working memory plays a key role in belief bias.
Quayle
J D
JD
Institute of Behavioural Sciences, University of Derby, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5GX, U.K. j.d.quayle@derby.ac.uk
Ball
L J
LJ
D003210:Concept Formation; D006801:Humans; D008128:Logic; D011939:Mental Recall; D011340:Problem Solving; D012153:Retention, Psychology