Abstract
This study investigated reasoning process as it happens in real conditions, where people in many situations can be based on relations of resemblance and analogy, in order to draw conclusions. In the experimental drawing independent variables were: a) the type of task (task that concerned natural objects (plants) and tasks that concerned concepts determined socially), b) the type of reasoning processes (deductive vs inductive type), c) the type of compared characteristics between the entities (essential - non essential), d) the type of conclusions (confirmatorial vs disproval of the analogy of the entities). Dependent variables were: a) estimates of certainty and b) estimates of correctness of the conclusions that related with analogy, and c) estimates of similarity, existence of analogy and estimates of clarity of analogy that existed between the compared entities. In the research participated 111 university students. The results showed that the independent variable, type of reasoning ...
This study investigated reasoning process as it happens in real conditions, where people in many situations can be based on relations of resemblance and analogy, in order to draw conclusions. In the experimental drawing independent variables were: a) the type of task (task that concerned natural objects (plants) and tasks that concerned concepts determined socially), b) the type of reasoning processes (deductive vs inductive type), c) the type of compared characteristics between the entities (essential - non essential), d) the type of conclusions (confirmatorial vs disproval of the analogy of the entities). Dependent variables were: a) estimates of certainty and b) estimates of correctness of the conclusions that related with analogy, and c) estimates of similarity, existence of analogy and estimates of clarity of analogy that existed between the compared entities. In the research participated 111 university students. The results showed that the independent variable, type of reasoning processes, did not differentiate statistically our results in the two tasks. Differentiation as for the type of compared characteristics was observed only in the estimates of certainty, and not in the estimates of correctness, in the confirmatorial conclusions and not in disproval conclusions, in the two tasks. When essential characteristics were compared, the certainty of resemblance between the entities was bigger. The projected knowledge in the target of analogy was evaluated as more correct and certain when essential common characteristics were compared, in the task of natural objects, but not in the task that concerned concepts determined socially. Finally, from the inspection of the results, it appeared that for the construction of an analogy, the individuals are being interested more for the likely common relations that exist between the compared entities, despite for their differences, in order to draw conclusions. In a second research the questions concerned in the inferential process that happen in the categorisation of fuzzy concepts, since it is supported that the categorisation of fuzzy concepts is based on resemblance and falls into the unspecified region between analogy and categorisation. Thus it was investigated how the estimates of certainty and correctness of those inferential processes that are based on the alignment between a target-concept and its overlying concept are differentiated in the same way as in analogy. The same independent and dependent variables with the previous experimental drawing were also used in the second experimental drawing. In the research participated 162 university students. The results showed that the independent variable, type of reasoning processes, did not differentiate our results, in the two tasks. Differentiation as for the type of compared characteristics was observed, in the estimates of certainty and correctness, in the confirmatorial conclusions and in disproval conclusions, in the two tasks. When essential common or different characteristics were compared, the certainty of matching or mismatching of the entities was bigger, respectively. The projected knowledge in the target-concept was evaluated as more correct and certain when essential common characteristics were compared in the tasks of natural kinds, but not in the task that concerned concepts determined socially. Thus, in the second research it appeared that, contrary to the analogy, for the investigated matching between the target-concept and its overlying concept, the essential and non essential, common and different, characteristics alter the estimates of certainty and correctness of the conclusions that refer to the matching of concepts and to the projected knowledge from the overlying concept in the target-concept. The differences that were observed between the two types of tasks it is supported, that they are owed to the relative knowledge and beliefs the individuals had. The above findings are being discussed in combination with the theories of reasoning.
show more
