Abstract:The Mediating Role of Artefacts in Deductive Reasoning Antonio Rizzo (rizzo@unisi.it) University of Siena, via dei Termini 6 Siena, SI 53100 ITALY Marco Palmonari (marco.palmonari@exitconsulting.it) Exit Consulting, via Malaga 4 Milano, MI 20143 ITALY Abstract Syllogistic Reasoning We present the results of an experiment designed to investigate the mediating role of artefacts in syllogistic reasoning. The aim of the experiment is to compare a new form of representation of the premises, designed according to the Models Theory, with two “classical” representations (Euler circles and Propositions). The results provide preliminary empirical evidence for both hypothesis of the experiment: the representation designed according to the principles of mental Models Theory supports the activity of subjects performing a syllogistic reasoning task better than the two “classical” representations; subjects’ performance depends also on the specific syllogism to be solved. Each form of representation offers specific constraints and affordances for the production of the mental models that need to be manipulated to produce an answer. According to Johnson-Laird and Byrne (1991), syllogistic reasoning is a particular kind of deductive reasoning in which two premises containing a single quantifier (all, none and some) and describing the relation among classes of elements (for instance “As” and “Bs” for the first premise and “Bs” and “Cs” for the second premise) are combined to obtain, when possible, a valid conclusion that describes the relationships among the “As” and the “Cs”. A valid conclusion describes a state of the world that is true when the states of the world described by the premises are true. Different theories have proposed to explain human performance on such tasks (e.g. probability heuristic model, formal rules, mental models). Among these approaches, mental Models Theory is the one that has received most empirical support to date. The basic tenet of this theory states that syllogistic reasoning is a semantic (non syntactic) process based on mental representations that are structurally isomorphic to the state of the world they describe. According to the theory, syllogistic deductions are the result of a three stage process: 1. flesh out the content of the premises; 2. combine the first and the second premises; 3. modify the model of the two premises to search for counterexamples. The theory allows one to formulate detailed predictions about subjects’ performance that have received strong empirical confirmation. For instance, it has been shown that the difficulty of a particular syllogism is a function of the number of different models of the premises the subject must flesh out and take into account to formulate valid conclusions. Although mental Models Theory assumes that there can be different sources of external information one could use for building mental models (Bucciarelli & Johnson-Laird, 1999), the experiments carried out so far on syllogistic reasoning have used mainly one kind of artefact, propositions, to represent the premises of syllogisms. Propositions, as mediating artefacts, have properties that intervene in the elaboration of the information they provide. The mental Model Theory has to some extent overlooked the role played by the specific kinds of representations the subjects are provided with. What would be the impact of different representations of the premises on subjects’ performance and errors? What would be the impact of a representation of the premises designed according to mental Keywords: Syllogistic reasoning, Representations, Cognitive Artefacts, Mental Model Theory. Artefacts and Human Cognition Recent developments within Cognitive Science (Zhang & Norman, 1994; 1995) have provided empirical support to the long lasting thesis that human cognition is mediated by artefacts (tools, rules, models, representations), which are both internal and external to the mind (Vygotsky, 1978). According to these findings, human activity cannot be investigated without taking into account the mediating artefacts. In the present paper our aim is to investigate the design of a new external representation developed according to some of the assumptions of the Model Theory and to compare it with other forms of external representations (propositions and Euler circles) in order to test i) the mediating role of artefacts in reasoning and ii) the potential advantages offered by an external representation that is in keeping with the assumptions of the Model Theory. The study focuses on a special kind of deductive reasoning i.e. syllogistic reasoning. The choice of syllogistic reasoning is due, on one hand, to the long tradition in designing representations that could support this task (Stenning, 2002) and, on the other hand, to the rich empirical evidence supporting Model Theory for such cognitive activity.

UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Inference in action

Inference In Action

UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) The information in intuitionistic logic

UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Instantial neighbourhood logic

UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) The Logic of Empirical Theories Revisited

A Mini-Guide to Logic in Action

The expressive language ALCNHR+K(D) for knowledge reasoning

UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Expressiveness modulo bisimilarity : a coalgebraic perspective

STRUCTURAL PROPERTIES OF DYNAMIC REASONING

Logics for Information Update

General dynamic logic

Synthese A Positive Information Logic for Inferential Information *

Logical Dynamics Meets Logical Pluralism?

A Meta-Logic of Inference Rules: Syntax

Logic in A Social Setting

Merging Observation and Access in Dynamic Logic

On Interdisciplinary Studies of a New Generation of Artificial Intelligence and Logic

Foundational Issues in Logical Dynamics.

The Mediating Role of Artefacts in Deductive Reasoning

Positive Logic with Adjoint Modalities: Proof Theory, Semantics and Reasoning about Information

Inference From Visible Information And Background Knowledge