Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAndrews, Glenda
dc.contributor.authorMihelic, Mandy
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-04T03:28:20Z
dc.date.available2017-05-04T03:28:20Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.date.modified2014-08-19T04:42:49Z
dc.identifier.issn2044-5911
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/20445911.2014.909434
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/62529
dc.description.abstractTransitive inference problems were presented in a modified conclusion evaluation procedure. Conclusions were believable or unbelievable and valid, invalid or indeterminate. The 67 undergraduate students read the premises, evaluated the conclusions (accept, reject, cannot tell), then provided confidence ratings. Fluid intelligence was also assessed. Acceptance of valid conclusions, rejection of invalid conclusions and cannot tell responses to indeterminate conclusions of non-integrable problems indicated use of analytic processing. Believability effects indicated the use of heuristic processing. Fluid intelligence and premise integration ability (non-integrable problems) predicted greater use of analytic processing on valid and invalid problems. Premise integration ability was associated with reduced belief bias on invalid problems. Premise integration ability appears to influence the extent of heuristic versus analytic processing. Confidence was sensitive to the presence of belief–logic conflict. Conflict detection scores reflecting this sensitivity were not associated with analytic processing suggesting that conflict detection occurs automatically and reflects an intuitive logic.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.description.publicationstatusYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherRoutledge
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationY
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom588
dc.relation.ispartofpageto596
dc.relation.ispartofissue5
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Cognitive Psychology
dc.relation.ispartofvolume26
dc.rights.retentionY
dc.subject.fieldofresearchCognitive Sciences not elsewhere classified
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPsychology
dc.subject.fieldofresearchCognitive Sciences
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode170299
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1701
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1702
dc.titleBelief-based and analytic processing in transitive inference: Further evidence for the importance of premise integration
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
dc.description.versionAccepted Manuscript (AM)
gro.facultyGriffith Health, School of Applied Psychology
gro.rights.copyright© 2014 Taylor & Francis (Routledge). This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in the Journal of Cognitive Psychology on 22 Apr 2014, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/20445911.2014.909434
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorAndrews, Glenda
gro.griffith.authorMihelic, Mandy


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record