Miceli M, Castelfranchi C
Institute of Psychology, National Research Council of Italy, Roma, Italy.
Br J Med Psychol. 1998 Jun;71(2):139-52. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8341.1998.tb01375.x.
This work is aimed at analysing the motivated reasoning underlying denial of some piece of information. Denial is first distinguished from both repression and biased interpretation; then an analysis is provided of the reasoning devices typical of denial. The rules on which reasoned denial is based are similar to those governing the individual's normal cognitive activity. Reasoned denial is here represented in the form of if-then implications, where the to-be-denied belief plays the role of a consequence drawn from a given premise. So, in order to deny such a consequence one may either deny its premise, or search an alternative consequence, or search an alternative premise, or deny the very relation of implication, and so on. Each type of reasoning is logically biased, while at the same time psychologically plausible and convincing. A typical feature shared by all the reasoning strategies considered is the identification of 'unproven' with 'false'.
这项工作旨在分析对某些信息予以否认背后的动机性推理。首先将否认与压抑和有偏见的解读区分开来；然后对否认所特有的推理手段进行分析。合理否认所依据的规则与支配个体正常认知活动的规则相似。合理否认在这里以“如果……那么……”的蕴含形式呈现，其中有待否认的信念充当从给定前提得出的结果的角色。所以，为了否认这样一个结果，人们可以要么否认其前提，要么寻找一个替代结果，要么寻找一个替代前提，要么否认蕴含关系本身，等等。每一种推理类型在逻辑上都是有偏差的，而与此同时在心理上又是合理且有说服力的。所考虑的所有推理策略共有的一个典型特征是将“未经证实的”等同于“错误的”。
