Reasoning and Schema Study Notes

  • Schemas and Scripts:
    • Internalized knowledge about how things work.
    • Schemas let us understand how situations and events will play out, allowing predictions, e.g., how a lecture works.
    • Schemas enable efficient encoding and storage of information, useful in similar situations.
    • Example: Using schema to buy a train ticket in a foreign country, even without knowing the language.
    • Activating a schema helps recognize familiar situations, easing navigation through them.
  • Scripts:
    • A specific type of schema providing particular information about how things work.
    • Like a script in a play, it tells you what to do and say in certain situations.
    • Examples: Script for ordering coffee, visiting the dentist, or sitting an exam.
    • Scripts involve steps and actors, e.g., at a coffee shop (barista, cashier).
    • Scripts allow fluent action, but deviations can be confusing.
    • Activating a script allows predictions about what will happen, e.g., at a restaurant.
    • Schemas and scripts allow us to draw inferences in conversations, even when responses aren't direct.
    • Soap operas often demonstrate drawing inferences based on schemas about relationships.
  • Memory Enhancement and False Memories:
    • Activating schema or script enhances memory for consistent details.
    • Study: Participants recalled twice as much information when told the script (making tea) at the start.
    • Identifying a script enhances memory, but can also lead to false memories.
    • Study: Participants who read a story about a dentist and were told the title later recalled things not in the story (drilling, filling), filling in the blanks based on the dentist script.
    • This can have negative impacts in the criminal justice system due to false memories.
  • Schemas and Scripts - Broader Implications
    • Help us negotiate the world fluently.
    • They are culturally and socially specific, driven by world experience and culture.
    • Humour sometimes works by breaking schemas/scripts; cultural differences in humour exist.
    • Scripts aren't just communication-based; they include individual routines (e.g., getting ready for work).
  • Reasoning: Introduction
    • Deductive reasoning is a part of daily life.
    • If a supermarket is open 7 AM-midnight, and there's no ice cream at home at 12:30 AM, one can infer you cannot get ice cream from the supermarket until 7 AM.
  • Deductive Reasoning
    • Drawing logical conclusions based solely on provided information.
    • Common type of thinking: start with pieces of information, draw a conclusion.
    • Deductive reasoning is the mental process of drawing logical inferences.
    • Central cognitive process, tied to human intelligence.
    • Higher IQ is associated with more accurate deductions and vice versa.
  • Deductive Reasoning Examples
    • Car needs petrol; car's tank is empty → car won't work.
    • In The Simpsons, Scratchy needs a heart to live, Scratchy doesn't have a heart → Scratchy dies.
  • Conditional Reasoning
    • A type of deductive reasoning with conditional relationships between subjects.
    • If you want to enroll in S2COG, you need to have completed 1BAM or its equivalent.
    • If you want to be a psychologist, you need to complete an accredited sequence in psychology.
  • Syllogism
    • Used in studying conditional reasoning.
    • Participants determine if the conclusion is valid, e.g., To drink alcohol in the US, you must be over 21. Little Jimmy is 18. Therefore, Little Jimmy is not legally permitted to drink alcohol in the US.
    • Defined by Aristotle, a syllogism is speech in which certain things having been supposed (premises), something different from those supposed (conclusion) results of necessity.
    • Syllogism Structure: A logical argument drawing a conclusion from two premises.
    • Example: All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, thus Socrates is mortal.
    • Valid vs. Invalid: Participants determine if the conclusion is valid or invalid.
  • Examples of Syllogisms
    • All dentists are mortal, all sadists are mortal, therefore, all dentists are sadists (invalid).
    • All pugs are dogs, all dogs are mammals, therefore, all pugs are mammals (valid).
    • All unicorns are awesome, I am awesome, therefore, I am a unicorn (invalid). This confirms part of the syllogism, but the conclusion doesn't logically follow.
  • Propositional Calculus
    • Classification of errors in reasoning.
    • Terms: antecedent (first part of statement, major premise) and consequence (second part, minor premise).
    • Reasoning involves affirming or denying these parts.
    • Example: If I fall in love, then I'll be happy.
    • Antecedent: If I fall in love.
    • Consequence: Then I'll be happy.
    • Affirming the antecedent (I am in love, therefore I'm happy) is valid.
    • Affirming the consequence (I am happy, therefore I'm in love) is invalid.
    • Denying the antecedent (I am not in love, therefore I'm not happy) is invalid.
    • Denying the consequent (I am not happy, therefore I must not be in love) is valid.
  • 4-Card Task (Wasson Selection Task)
    • Used to test logical reasoning with cards having a letter on one side, a number on the other.
    • Task: Decide which cards to turn over to test: If there's a D on one side, there's a 5 on the other.
    • Correct answer: Turn over the D and the 2.
    • People tend to look for confirming evidence (D and 5) rather than disconfirming evidence.
    • The rule doesn't say anything about A's, so you don't need to turn over the A card at all.
    • Confirmation Bias: We favor evidence consistent with our beliefs, we favor evidence that is consistent with our beliefs rather than trying to disprove them.
    • In the original study, 96% got it wrong.
    • When testing a hypothesis, avoid designing an experiment to confirm it; design one to disprove it.
    • Concrete vs. Abstract Information: Switched to a concrete example. If a person's drinking beer, they must be over 18 years of age.
    • People reason more logically with concrete versions.
    • A negative sentence takes longer to process and is more error-prone.
    • The card does not have a 3 on the right, and you need to determine whether the conclusion is valid or invalid. Therefore, the card has an A on the left.
  • Belief Bias
    • Logical reasoning is affected by beliefs.
    • People use general knowledge rather than the information in the syllogism.
    • Example: If the object in my hand is a frog, then it is green. The object is green, therefore it is a frog (invalid but often seen as valid due to real-world knowledge).
    • High percentage of people make errors, confirming the consequence due to top-down knowledge.
    • Should rely just on the information that's provided.
    • Belief bias: making judgments based on beliefs rather than logic rules.
    • Overactive top-down knowledge.
    • Personal sensitivities make reasoning illogical; this was shown in a study with people with high levels of social anxiety.
    • People with lower IQ scores and less flexible thinking are more susceptible to belief bias.
  • Confirmation Bias
    • We look to try and confirm that we are right.
    • We seek out evidence that confirms our beliefs and are resistant to stuff that challenges our beliefs.
    • In the tutorial, you've been asked to complete a personality test. In the next week's tutorial, you're then given a piece of paper in an envelope that has your name on the front, and that gives you your analysis of the personalities. It had no personal aspects to the person, but people still believed it.
    • High IQ are closely related to higher levels of flexible thinking too.
    • Horoscopes and psychic readings rely on people looking for consistent evidence.
    • Doctor Google may trick people into believing conditions they may not have.
    • Depression might make people remember bad memories to confirm feelings.
  • Wasson Number Task
    • People were presented with a trio of numbers, for example, 246, and told them that series obey is the rule, and that your job is to determine what the rule is.
    • Participants had to guess what the rule was, and were told to provide groups of three numbers that follow the rule.
    • The rule was that numbers had to be in ascending order.
    • People threw out groups of numbers that tried to confirm what they thought the rule was; they weren't trying to break it.
  • Confirmation Bias - Influence on Evidence Evaluation
    • Study with people who had opinions about capital punishment (death penalty) showed that
    • Regardless of the content of the articles, so regardless and whether the articles actually said that capital punishment has a deterrent. If you were in favour of capital punishment, you thought that the articles were also in favour.
  • Memory and Gambling
    • Individuals who gamble regularly and believed they had good winning strategies were studied.
    • Losses were remembered as flukes or coincidences, whereas wins were wins.
  • Belief Perseverance
    • Beliefs persist even when disconfirming evidence is undeniable.
    • Study by Ross asked participants to determine whether notes were authentic or not.
    • Participants got arbitrary feedback.
    • At the end of the study, feedback was absolute rubbish it was said not to relate to one's performance.
    • Despite the researcher stating feedback was false, those who'd been told they were above average still rated themselves as such, and vice versa.
    • Relates more to confirmation bias.