“All toads are animals” “All men are animals” Therefore, “All men are toads.” Many would evaluate this as a valid syllogism, due to its ALL ALL ALL form. This is because:

Shafir (1993) found that participants were both more likely to AWARD custody to a parent with lots of positive and negative qualities and DENY custody to that same parent. Participants’ performance on this task violates:

Consider the following premises and conclusion: Premise 1: If the company increases its marketing budget, then sales will improve. Premise 2: Sales improved. Conculsion: The company increased its marketing budget. In this set of statements, what is the conclusion? 

A conclusion in a cateogrical syllogism is logically invalid if: 

If P then Q Not Q Therefore Not P  

Which theory suggests that humans have evolved specific cognitive mechanisms to detect rule-breakers in social exchange situations?

When dual process theories indicate that some reasoners may use a “probabilistic” cause-effect strategy for reasoning problems, what does that mean? 

According to the mental models approach: 

In Mental Models theory, incorrectly rejecting Modus Tollens conclusions typically occurs because:

In their 2005 study on the effects of individual differences in working memory capacity on reasoning with conditional statements, DeNays et al. found that: