Bayesians Too Should Follow Wason: A Comprehensive Accuracy-Based Analysis of the Selection Task.

Wason's selection task is a paramount experimental problem in the study of human reasoning, often connected with the celebrated ravens paradox in the philosophical literature. Various normative accounts of the selection task rely on a Bayesian approach. Some claim vindication of participants' ration...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Vol. 75; no. 2; pp. 347 - 374
Autores principales: Vindrola, Filippo, Crupi, Vincenzo
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: University of Chicago Press Jun2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=177661494&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 177661494
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00070882
        BPL
      jtl: British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00070882
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jun2024
      vid: 75
      iid: 2
      pid: 415
      pub: University of Chicago Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        177661494
        10.1086/716170
      ppf: 347
      ppct: 27
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Bayesians Too Should Follow Wason: A Comprehensive Accuracy-Based Analysis of the Selection Task.
      aug:
        au:
          Vindrola, Filippo
          Crupi, Vincenzo
        affil:
          Ruhr University Bochum. Bochum, Germany.
          University of Turin. Torino, Italy.
      su:
        Task analysis
        Philosophical literature
        Intuition
        Human experimentation
      sug:
        subj:
          Task analysis
          Philosophical literature
          Intuition
          Human experimentation
      ab: Wason's selection task is a paramount experimental problem in the study of human reasoning, often connected with the celebrated ravens paradox in the philosophical literature. Various normative accounts of the selection task rely on a Bayesian approach. Some claim vindication of participants' rationality. Others don't, thus following Wason's original intuition that observed responses are mistaken. In this article we argue that despite claims to the contrary, all these accounts actually speak to the same effect: Wason was right. First, we provide a new accuracy-based analysis of the selection task that includes the existing proposals as special cases. We then show on this basis that none can actually vindicate participants' rationality. We conclude that all normative renditions considered eventually concur: all in all, Bayesians should follow Wason in the selection task.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2024
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N