|Appears in Collections:||Psychology Journal Articles|
|Peer Review Status:||Refereed|
|Title:||Basic Conditional Reasoning: How Children Mimic Counterfactual Reasoning|
Basic Conditional Reasoning
Possible worlds semantics
|Citation:||Leahy B, Rafetseder E & Perner J (2014) Basic Conditional Reasoning: How Children Mimic Counterfactual Reasoning, Studia Logica, 102 (4), pp. 793-810.|
|Abstract:||Children approach counterfactual questions about stories with a reasoning strategy that falls short of adults’ Counterfactual Reasoning (CFR). It was dubbed “Basic Conditional Reasoning” (BCR) in Rafetseder et al. (Child Dev 81(1):376–389, 2010). In this paper we provide a characterisation of the differences between BCR and CFR using a distinction between permanent and nonpermanent features of stories and Lewis/Stalnaker counterfactual logic. The critical difference pertains to how consistency between a story and a conditional antecedent incompatible with a nonpermanent feature of the story is achieved. Basic conditional reasoners simply drop all nonpermanent features of the story. Counterfactual reasoners preserve as much of the story as possible while accommodating the antecedent.|
|Rights:||This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.|
|Affiliation:||University of Konstanz|
University of Salzburg
|Leahy Studia Logica 2014.pdf||450.45 kB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.