Response Patterns to a Syllogistic Categorical Reasoning Task with Abstract Groups
- Joosep Olop
- Eve Kikas
Abstract
The current study examined response patterns of young adults (N = 861) to a particular syllogism with abstract categories that contained the fallacy of the undistributed middle. Participants had to evaluate all given conclusions. Results showed that, despite being invalid, conclusions that used the word “some” were more likely to be selected as valid or possible compared to conclusions that used “all” or “none”. In addition, we also analyzed participants’ solutions to the task at the individual level (i.e., all evaluations to conclusions that contained the end terms). The aim was to detect dominant patterns. Results showed five dominant patterns. The significance of these findings and limitations are discussed.
- Full Text: PDF
- DOI:10.5539/jedp.v12n1p63
Journal Metrics
(The data was calculated based on Google Scholar Citations)
1. Google-based Impact Factor (2021): 1.11
2. h-index (December 2021): 29
3. i10-index (December 2021): 87
4. h5-index (December 2021): N/A
5. h5-median (December 2021): N/A
Index
- Academic Journals Database
- CNKI Scholar
- Copyright Clearance Center
- CrossRef
- Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek (EZB)
- EuroPub Database
- Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA)
- Harvard Library
- Jisc Library Hub Discover
- JournalSeek
- JournalTOCs
- LIVIVO (ZB MED)
- LOCKSS
- MIAR
- Open Access Journals Search Engine(OAJSE)
- PKP Open Archives Harvester
- Publons
- ROAD
- Scilit
- SHERPA/RoMEO
- Standard Periodical Directory
- Stanford Libraries
- Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB)
- UCR Library
- UoB Library
- WorldCat
- Zeitschriften Daten Bank (ZDB)
Contact
- Carol WongEditorial Assistant
- jedp@ccsenet.org