Ana Cristina Quelhas (**)
Csongor Juhos (**)
Jorge Senos (**)
Teresa Almeida Rocha (**)
RESUMO
De acordo com a teoria dos modelos mentais (Johnson-Laird, 1983; Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 1991) a interpretação de uma frase condicional, do tipo Se p, então q, gera os modelos iniciais:
]]> p q... em que os três pontos representam um modelo sem conteúdo explícito. A representação completa da condicional compreende os seguintes modelos explícitos:
p q
¬p ¬q
¬p q
em que “¬” serve aqui para indicar a negação. A partir deste quadro teórico, e da suposição de que uma inferência é tanto mais difícil quanto maior o número de modelos explícitos que requer, é possível colocar hipóteses sobre diferenças no nível de dificuldade nas inferências com os quatro silogismos condicionais.
Na experiência que iremos descrever pretende-se testar essas hipóteses em sujeitos de diferentes níveis etários (8, 11 e 15 anos). A partir dos resultados obtidos serão adiantadas hipóteses sobre o progressivo desenvolvimento da capacidade de representar os três modelos mentais de interpretação das condicionais.
Serão ainda realçadas diferenças na resposta dos sujeitos que derivam de diferenças no conteúdo das frases condicionais. Um último objectivo, de carácter exploratório, prende-se com a comparação das respostas em sujeitos de duas nacionalidades (Portuguesa e Húngara).
Assim, o grupo de variáveis independentes define um plano factorial misto 2X3X2X4 (Nacionalidade X Idade X Conteúdo X Silogismo), dado que a última variável é intra-sujeitos.
Palavras-chave: Silogismos condicionais, Teoria do modelos mentais, Desenvolvimento do raciocínio.
]]>
ABSTRACT
According to the mental models theory (Johnson-Laird, 1983; Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 1991) the interpretation of a conditional sentence of the kind If p then q creates the initial models:
p q
... where the three dots represent a model without explicit content. The complete representation of the conditional has the following explicit models:
p q
¬p ¬q
¬p q
where “¬” is used to indicate a negation. Based on the mental models, which advocate that the greater the number of explicit models needed, the more difficult is an inference, it is possible to consider hypotheses about the differences in the difficulty level in inferences with the four conditional syllogisms.
]]> In the experiment described, our goal is to test those hypotheses in subjects of different ages (8, 11 and 15 years old). Based on the results, we present hypotheses about the progressive development of the capacity to represent the three mental models in conditional sentences interpretation.We also want to emphasise the differences in the answers of the subjects, that are a consequence of the differences in the content of the conditional sentences. Our last goal is to explore the differences in the answers by subjects of two nationalities (Portuguese and Hungarian).
Thus, the group of independent variables defines a mixed factorial design 2X3X2X4 (Nationality X Age X Content X Syllogism), since the last variable is within subjects.
Key words: Conditional syllogisms, Mental models theory, Development of reasoning.
Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.
Full text only available in PDF format.
REFERÊNCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS
Bara, B. (1994). Developing induction. International Studies in the Philosophy of Sience, 8, 31-34. [ Links ]
Bara, B. (1995). Cognitive science: A developmental approach to the simulation of the mind. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Braine, M. D. S. (1978). On the relation between the natural logic of reasoning and standard logic. Psychological Review, 85, 1-21.
Braine, M. D. S. (1990). The «natural logic» approach to reasoning. In W. F. Overton (Ed.), Resoning, necessity, and logic: Developmental perspectives (pp. 135-157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Campbell, R., & Olson, D. (1990). Children’s thinking. In R. Grieve & M. Hughes (Eds.), Cognitive development to adolescence (pp. 105-138). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Case, R., Kurland, D. M., & Goldberg, J. (1982). Operational efficiency and the growth of short-term memory span. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 33, 386-404.
Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1985). Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 391-416.
Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). On the natural selection of reasoning theories. Cognition, 33, 285-313.
Chi, M. T. H. (1978). Knowledge structures and memory development. In R. S. Siegler (Ed.), Children´s thinking: What develops (pp. 73-96). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Evans, J. St. B. T. (1982). The psychology of deductive reasoning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Evans, J. St. B. T. (1993). Bias and racionality. In K. I. Manktelow & D. E. Over (Eds.), Rationality: Psychological and philosophical perspectives (pp. 630). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
]]> Evans, J. St. B. T., Newstead, S. E., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1993). Human reasoning: The psychology of deduction. U.K.: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.Henle, M. (1962). On the relation between logic and thinking. Psychological Review, 69, 366-378.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Toward a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1988). A taxonomy of thinking. In R. J. Sternberg & E. E. Smith (Eds.), The psychology of human thought (pp. 173-194). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1990). The development the reasoning ability. In G. Butterworth & Bryant (Eds.), Causes of development: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 85-110). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1993). Human and machine thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1991). Deduction. Houve, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Johnson-Laird, P. N., Oakhill, J. V., & Bull, D. (1986). Children´s syllogistic reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 35-38.
Markovits, H. (1993). The development of conditional reasoning: A piegetian reformulation of mental models theory. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39, 131--158.
Oakhill, J. (1988). The development of children's reasoning obility: Information-processing approaches. In K. Richardson, & S. Sheldon (Eds.), Cognitive development to adolescence (pp. 169-188). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
]]> Oakhill, J. V., & Johnson-Laird , P. N. (1985). The effects of belief on the spontaneous production of syllogistic conclusions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 553-569.Quelhas, A. C. (1996). Raciocínio condicional: Mode-los mentais e esquemas pragmáticos. Lisboa: ISPA.
Rips, L. J. (1983). Cognitive processes in propositional reasoning. Psychological Review, 90, 38-71.
Rips, L. J. (1988). Dedution. In R. J. Sternberg & E. E. Smith (Eds.), The psychology of human thougth (pp. 116-152). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rips, L. J. (1994). The psychology of proof: Deductive reasoning in human thinking. USA: Bradford Book.
Taplin, E. J., Staudenmayer, H., & Taddonio, J. L. (1974). Developmental changes in condicional reasoning: Linguistic or logical?. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 17 (2), 360-373.
Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (Vol. 1). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
(*) Resultados desta experiência foram parcialmente apresentados no Workshop sobre Deductive reasoning and strategies (Bruxelas, Março de 1998) e na IXth European Conference on Developmental Psychology (Grécia, Setembro de 1999).
(**) Instituto Superior de Psicologia Aplicada, Lisboa.
]]>