Who Is Sensitive to Selection Biases in Inductive Reasoning?

被引:2
|
作者
Hayes, Brett K. [1 ]
Liew, Shi Xian [1 ]
Desai, Saoirse Connor [1 ]
Navarro, Danielle J. [1 ]
Wen, Yuhang [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ New South Wales, Sch Psychol, Kensington, NSW 2052, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
inductive reasoning; selection biases; individual differences; working memory; Bayesian models; WORKING-MEMORY CAPACITY; INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES; COGNITIVE REFLECTION; HEURISTICS; ABILITY; MODEL; SIMILARITY; COMPONENTS; ATTENTION;
D O I
10.1037/xlm0001171
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
The samples of evidence we use to make inferences in everyday and formal settings are often subject to selection biases. Two property induction experiments examined group and individual sensitivity to one type of selection bias: sampling frames - causal constraints that only allow certain types of instances to be sampled. Group data from both experiments indicated that people were sensitive to the effects of such frames, showing narrower generalization when sample instances were selected because they shared a target property (property sampling) than when instances were sampled because they belonged to a particular group (category sampling). Group generalization patterns conformed to the predictions of a Bayesian model of property induction that incorporates a selective sampling mechanism. In each experiment, however, there was considerable individual variation, with a nontrivial minority showing little sensitivity to sampling frames. Experiment 2 examined correlates of frames sensitivity. A composite measure of working memory capacity predicted individual sensitivity to sampling frames. These results have important implications for current debates about people's ability to factor sample selection mechanisms into their inferences and for the development of formal models of inductive inference.
引用
收藏
页码:284 / 300
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Inductive Reasoning Model
    Krueger, Joachim I.
    Gruening, David J.
    Heck, Patrick
    Freestone, David
    PSYCHOLOGICAL INQUIRY, 2024, 35 (01) : 11 - 25
  • [2] Inductive reasoning 2.0
    Hayes, Brett K.
    Heit, Evan
    WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2018, 9 (03)
  • [3] Executive functions in inductive and deductive reasoning
    Kazali, Elena
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY, 2025, 252
  • [5] Inductive reasoning
    Hayes, Brett K.
    Heit, Evan
    Swendsen, Haruka
    WILEY INTERDISCIPLINARY REVIEWS-COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2010, 1 (02) : 278 - 292
  • [6] Revealing human inductive biases for category learning by simulating cultural transmission
    Canini, Kevin R.
    Griffiths, Thomas L.
    Vanpaemel, Wolf
    Kalish, Michael L.
    PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2014, 21 (03) : 785 - 793
  • [7] Prefrontal and parietal activity is modulated by the rule complexity of inductive reasoning and can be predicted by a cognitive model
    Jia, Xiuqin
    Liang, Peipeng
    Shi, Lin
    Wang, Defeng
    Li, Kuncheng
    NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA, 2015, 66 : 67 - 74
  • [8] Measuring inductive reasoning in school contexts: a review of instruments and predictors
    Vo, De Van
    Csapo, Beno
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INNOVATION AND LEARNING, 2022, 31 (04) : 506 - 525
  • [9] Structured Statistical Models of Inductive Reasoning
    Kemp, Charles
    Tenenbaum, Joshua B.
    PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2009, 116 (01) : 20 - 58
  • [10] Properties of inductive reasoning
    Evan Heit
    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2000, 7 : 569 - 592