Smith E E, Shafir E, Osherson D
Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 48104.
Cognition. 1993 Oct-Nov;49(1-2):67-96. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(93)90036-u.
Judging the strength of an argument may underlie many reasoning and decision-making tasks. In this article, we focus on "category-based" arguments, in which the premises and conclusion are of the form All members of C have property P, where C is a natural category. An example is "Dobermans have sesamoid bones. Therefore, German shepherds have sesamoid bones." The strength of such an argument is reflected in the judged probability that the conclusion is true given that the premises are true. The processes that mediate such probability judgments depend on whether the predicate is "blank"--an unfamiliar property that does not enter the reasoning process (e.g., "have sesamoid bones")--or "non-blank"--a relatively familiar property that is easier to reason from (e.g., "can bite through wire"). With blank predicates, probability judgments are based on similarity relations between the premise and conclusion categories. With non-blank predicates, probability judgements are based on both similarity relations and the plausibility of premises and conclusion.
判断一个论证的强度可能是许多推理和决策任务的基础。在本文中，我们关注“基于类别的”论证，其中前提和结论的形式为“C类的所有成员都具有属性P”，这里C是一个自然类别。一个例子是“杜宾犬有籽骨。因此，德国牧羊犬有籽骨。” 这种论证的强度体现在给定前提为真时结论为真的判断概率上。调节这种概率判断的过程取决于谓词是“空白的”——一种不熟悉的属性，不进入推理过程（例如，“有籽骨”）——还是“非空白的”——一种相对熟悉的属性，更容易从中进行推理（例如，“能咬断电线”）。对于空白谓词，概率判断基于前提类别和结论类别之间的相似关系。对于非空白谓词，概率判断基于相似关系以及前提和结论的合理性。
