Oaksford, Mike and Chater, N. (1996) Rational explanation of the selection task. Psychological Review 103 (2), pp. 381-391. ISSN 0033-295X.
Abstract
M. Oaksford and N. Chater (O&C, see record 1995-08271-001) presented the first quantitative model of R C. Wason's (1966) selection task in which performance is rational. J. St. B. T. Evans and D. E. Over (see record 83:25190) reply that O&C's account is normatively incorrect and cannot model K. N. Kirby's (see record 1995-04302-001) or R Pollard and J. St. B. T. Evans's (see record 1984-30572-001) data. It is argued that an equivalent measure satisfies their normative concerns and that a modification of O&C's model accounts for their empirical concerns. D. Laming (see record 83:25220) argues that O&C made unjustifiable psychological assumptions and that a "correct" Bayesian analysis agrees with logic. It is argued that O&C's model makes normative and psychological sense and that Laming's analysis is not Bayesian. A. Almor and S. A. Sloman (see record 83:25168) argue that O&C cannot explain their data. It is argued that Almor and Sloman's data do not bear on O&C's model because they alter the nature of the task. It is concluded that O&C's model remains the most compelling and comprehensive account of the selection task.
Metadata
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| School: | Birkbeck Faculties and Schools > Faculty of Science > School of Psychological Sciences |
| Depositing User: | Administrator |
| Date Deposited: | 19 Sep 2016 10:42 |
| Last Modified: | 02 Aug 2023 17:26 |
| URI: | https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/16088 |
Statistics
Additional statistics are available via IRStats2.
Archive Staff Only (login required)
