Norm Conflicts and Conditionals

Suppose that 2 competing norms, N1 and N2, can be identified such that a given person's response can be interpreted as correct according to N1 but incorrect according to N2. Which of these two norms, if any, should one use to interpret such a response? In this article, we seek to address this f...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychological review 2019-10, Vol.126 (5), p.611-633
Main Authors: Skovgaard-Olsen, Niels, Kellen, David, Hahn, Ulrike, Klauer, Karl Christoph
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Attitude
Attitudes
Case studies
Cognition & reasoning
Competence
Conflict
Conflict, Psychological
Female
Human
Humans
Individual differences
Judgment
Judgments
Logic
Male
Models, Psychological
Personal relationships
Psychology
Reasoning
Statistical Probability
Task
Test Construction
Thinking - physiology
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Suppose that 2 competing norms, N1 and N2, can be identified such that a given person's response can be interpreted as correct according to N1 but incorrect according to N2. Which of these two norms, if any, should one use to interpret such a response? In this article, we seek to address this fundamental problem by studying individual variation in the interpretation of conditionals by establishing individual profiles of the participants based on their case judgments and reflective attitudes. To investigate participants' reflective attitudes, we introduce a new experimental paradigm called the scorekeeping task. As a case study, we identify the participants who follow the suppositional theory of conditionals (N1) versus inferentialism (N2) and investigate to what extent internally consistent competence models can be reconstructed for the participants on this basis. After extensive empirical investigations, an apparent reasoning error with and-to-if inferences was found in 1 of these 2 groups. The implications of this case study for debates on the proper role of normative considerations in psychology are discussed.
ISSN:0033-295X
1939-1471
DOI:10.1037/rev0000150