Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation

Autores
Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo; Crivello, María del Carmen; Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno; Razumiejczyk, Eugenia
Año de publicación
2017
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
We aimed to study how compound negation of conjunctions and disjunctions is understood and represented. In particular, we aimed to test time course predictions consistent with the Mental Models Theory of negation proposed in 2012 by Khemlani, Orenes, and Johnson-Laird. Consistent with this theory, we conjectured that the consideration of possibilities elicited by any given information regulates the processing of compound negation. We studied response type patterns to replicate previous findings as well as response time patterns to generate novel chronometrical evidence. We conducted a within-subjects experiment to test a set of five experimental hypotheses. We used a sentence-equivalence task. Participants were asked to find a logical equivalence for a given compound negation of a conjunction or a disjunction. Four possible response options were presented, but only one of them was correct according to sentential logic. We also tested predictions derived from theories that argue against the Mental Models Theory. The evidence resulted consistent with the model theory of negation and incompatible with alternative accounts. In particular, our results did not support the Psychology of Proof and the Dual-Process approach to negation.
Fil: Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Crivello, María del Carmen. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Razumiejczyk, Eugenia. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
COMPOUND NEGATION
MENTAL MODELS
REASONING BIASES
RESPONSE TIMES
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/72647
Acceder
id CONICETDig_0f495453f701f22bd16957c0c00addc4
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/72647
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of NegationMacbeth, Guillermo EduardoCrivello, María del CarmenFioramonti, Mauro BrunoRazumiejczyk, EugeniaCOMPOUND NEGATIONMENTAL MODELSREASONING BIASESRESPONSE TIMEShttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5We aimed to study how compound negation of conjunctions and disjunctions is understood and represented. In particular, we aimed to test time course predictions consistent with the Mental Models Theory of negation proposed in 2012 by Khemlani, Orenes, and Johnson-Laird. Consistent with this theory, we conjectured that the consideration of possibilities elicited by any given information regulates the processing of compound negation. We studied response type patterns to replicate previous findings as well as response time patterns to generate novel chronometrical evidence. We conducted a within-subjects experiment to test a set of five experimental hypotheses. We used a sentence-equivalence task. Participants were asked to find a logical equivalence for a given compound negation of a conjunction or a disjunction. Four possible response options were presented, but only one of them was correct according to sentential logic. We also tested predictions derived from theories that argue against the Mental Models Theory. The evidence resulted consistent with the model theory of negation and incompatible with alternative accounts. In particular, our results did not support the Psychology of Proof and the Dual-Process approach to negation.Fil: Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Crivello, María del Carmen. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Razumiejczyk, Eugenia. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaSAGE Publications2017-06info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/72647Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo; Crivello, María del Carmen; Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno; Razumiejczyk, Eugenia; Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation; SAGE Publications; Sage Open; 7; 2; 6-2017; 1-82158-2440CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1177/2158244017716216info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244017716216info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-10-15T15:08:37Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/72647instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-10-15 15:08:37.824CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
title Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
spellingShingle Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo
COMPOUND NEGATION
MENTAL MODELS
REASONING BIASES
RESPONSE TIMES
title_short Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
title_full Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
title_fullStr Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
title_full_unstemmed Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
title_sort Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo
Crivello, María del Carmen
Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno
Razumiejczyk, Eugenia
author Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo
author_facet Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo
Crivello, María del Carmen
Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno
Razumiejczyk, Eugenia
author_role author
author2 Crivello, María del Carmen
Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno
Razumiejczyk, Eugenia
author2_role author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv COMPOUND NEGATION
MENTAL MODELS
REASONING BIASES
RESPONSE TIMES
topic COMPOUND NEGATION
MENTAL MODELS
REASONING BIASES
RESPONSE TIMES
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.1
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv We aimed to study how compound negation of conjunctions and disjunctions is understood and represented. In particular, we aimed to test time course predictions consistent with the Mental Models Theory of negation proposed in 2012 by Khemlani, Orenes, and Johnson-Laird. Consistent with this theory, we conjectured that the consideration of possibilities elicited by any given information regulates the processing of compound negation. We studied response type patterns to replicate previous findings as well as response time patterns to generate novel chronometrical evidence. We conducted a within-subjects experiment to test a set of five experimental hypotheses. We used a sentence-equivalence task. Participants were asked to find a logical equivalence for a given compound negation of a conjunction or a disjunction. Four possible response options were presented, but only one of them was correct according to sentential logic. We also tested predictions derived from theories that argue against the Mental Models Theory. The evidence resulted consistent with the model theory of negation and incompatible with alternative accounts. In particular, our results did not support the Psychology of Proof and the Dual-Process approach to negation.
Fil: Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Crivello, María del Carmen. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Razumiejczyk, Eugenia. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description We aimed to study how compound negation of conjunctions and disjunctions is understood and represented. In particular, we aimed to test time course predictions consistent with the Mental Models Theory of negation proposed in 2012 by Khemlani, Orenes, and Johnson-Laird. Consistent with this theory, we conjectured that the consideration of possibilities elicited by any given information regulates the processing of compound negation. We studied response type patterns to replicate previous findings as well as response time patterns to generate novel chronometrical evidence. We conducted a within-subjects experiment to test a set of five experimental hypotheses. We used a sentence-equivalence task. Participants were asked to find a logical equivalence for a given compound negation of a conjunction or a disjunction. Four possible response options were presented, but only one of them was correct according to sentential logic. We also tested predictions derived from theories that argue against the Mental Models Theory. The evidence resulted consistent with the model theory of negation and incompatible with alternative accounts. In particular, our results did not support the Psychology of Proof and the Dual-Process approach to negation.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-06
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/72647
Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo; Crivello, María del Carmen; Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno; Razumiejczyk, Eugenia; Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation; SAGE Publications; Sage Open; 7; 2; 6-2017; 1-8
2158-2440
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/72647
identifier_str_mv Macbeth, Guillermo Eduardo; Crivello, María del Carmen; Fioramonti, Mauro Bruno; Razumiejczyk, Eugenia; Chronometrical Evidence Supports the Model Theory of Negation; SAGE Publications; Sage Open; 7; 2; 6-2017; 1-8
2158-2440
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1177/2158244017716216
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244017716216
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv SAGE Publications
publisher.none.fl_str_mv SAGE Publications
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1846083232925220864
score 13.22299

Publicaciones similares