engleski

The effects of difficulty and validity of syllogisms on confidence and response times

In the domain of reasoning, confidence judgments made after evaluating a conclusion or after producing a conclusion indicate the level of certainty with which the conclusion was endorsed. Previous studies found that reasoning accuracy and confidence were generally not correlated, and that confidence and accuracy were mediated by different variables. Based on the assumptions of the Self-Consistency Model of subjective confidence, it is proposed that confidence judgments should reflect the commonalities of the processes and contents of reasoning shared among individuals. Therefore, when the incorrect responses are given by the majority of participants, those responses should be associated with high confidence. The aim of the study was to examine the effects of difficulty of syllogisms (easy, intermediate, and difficult) on confidence judgments and response times. We hypothesized that both easy and difficult syllogisms should be evaluated faster and with higher confidence than syllogisms of the intermediate level of difficulty. Forty-seven undergraduate psychology students evaluated 24 syllogistic problems, which varied in difficulty (easy, intermediate, and difficulty) and validity (valid and non-valid). Confidence judgments were higher for the easy and difficult syllogisms than for the syllogism of intermediate level of difficulty. Response times were faster for the easy and difficult syllogisms than for the syllogisms of intermediate level of difficulty. Confidence and response times did not differ between valid and invalid syllogisms. Therefore, confidence judgments and response times are not monotonically related to the difficulty of syllogisms, and they are not sensitive to the validity of syllogisms.

syllogistic reasoning ; Self-Consistency Model ; confidence judgments

nije evidentirano