Advanced

The Selective Laziness of Reasoning

Trouche, Emmanuel; Johansson, Petter LU ; Hall, Lars LU and Mercier, Hugo (2015) In Cognitive Science
Abstract
Reasoning research suggests that people use more stringent criteria when they evaluate others' arguments than when they produce arguments themselves. To demonstrate this "selective laziness," we used a choice blindness manipulation. In two experiments, participants had to produce a series of arguments in response to reasoning problems, and they were then asked to evaluate other people's arguments about the same problems. Unknown to the participants, in one of the trials, they were presented with their own argument as if it was someone else's. Among those participants who accepted the manipulation and thus thought they were evaluating someone else's argument, more than half (56% and 58%) rejected the arguments that were in fact their own.... (More)
Reasoning research suggests that people use more stringent criteria when they evaluate others' arguments than when they produce arguments themselves. To demonstrate this "selective laziness," we used a choice blindness manipulation. In two experiments, participants had to produce a series of arguments in response to reasoning problems, and they were then asked to evaluate other people's arguments about the same problems. Unknown to the participants, in one of the trials, they were presented with their own argument as if it was someone else's. Among those participants who accepted the manipulation and thus thought they were evaluating someone else's argument, more than half (56% and 58%) rejected the arguments that were in fact their own. Moreover, participants were more likely to reject their own arguments for invalid than for valid answers. This demonstrates that people are more critical of other people's arguments than of their own, without being overly critical: They are better able to tell valid from invalid arguments when the arguments are someone else's rather than their own. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Cognitive Science
publisher
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
external identifiers
  • pmid:26452437
  • scopus:84944389204
ISSN
0364-0213
DOI
10.1111/cogs.12303
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
3b0a6251-5467-4772-be13-32d0ce4cbf05 (old id 8155578)
date added to LUP
2015-11-18 11:28:04
date last changed
2017-01-01 03:41:22
@article{3b0a6251-5467-4772-be13-32d0ce4cbf05,
  abstract     = {Reasoning research suggests that people use more stringent criteria when they evaluate others' arguments than when they produce arguments themselves. To demonstrate this "selective laziness," we used a choice blindness manipulation. In two experiments, participants had to produce a series of arguments in response to reasoning problems, and they were then asked to evaluate other people's arguments about the same problems. Unknown to the participants, in one of the trials, they were presented with their own argument as if it was someone else's. Among those participants who accepted the manipulation and thus thought they were evaluating someone else's argument, more than half (56% and 58%) rejected the arguments that were in fact their own. Moreover, participants were more likely to reject their own arguments for invalid than for valid answers. This demonstrates that people are more critical of other people's arguments than of their own, without being overly critical: They are better able to tell valid from invalid arguments when the arguments are someone else's rather than their own.},
  author       = {Trouche, Emmanuel and Johansson, Petter and Hall, Lars and Mercier, Hugo},
  issn         = {0364-0213},
  language     = {eng},
  month        = {10},
  publisher    = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates},
  series       = {Cognitive Science},
  title        = {The Selective Laziness of Reasoning},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12303},
  year         = {2015},
}