Publicação

Judgment of Covariation: A Review

Ver documento

Detalhes bibliográficos
Resumo:This paper reviews a selection of influential studies on judgment of covariation in order to examine how accurate people's covariation judgments are in general, and how sophisticated are the reasoning strategies that they use to make those judgments. Very different answers have been given to these questions, depending on several factors, including the method that is used to assess people's performance on these tasks, and the motivation that people have to reach certain conclusions. It is argued that, although people are often quite poor at judging covariation, they are flexible in the reasoning strategies that they use to do so, and they have the potential to use sophisticated strategies and make accurate judgments when certain conditions are met.
Autores principais:Mata,André
Assunto:Judgment Covariation Contingency Motivated reasoning
Ano:2016
País:Portugal
Tipo de documento:artigo
Tipo de acesso:acesso aberto
Instituição associada:Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia
Idioma:inglês
Origem:SciELO Portugal
_version_ 1868441780826931200
author Mata,André
author_facet Mata,André
author_role author
country_str PT
creators_json_txt [{\"Person.name\":\"Mata,André\"}]
datacite.creators.creator.creatorName.fl_str_mv Mata,André
datacite.rights.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
datacite.subjects.subject.fl_str_mv Judgment
Covariation
Contingency
Motivated reasoning
datacite.titles.title.fl_str_mv Judgment of Covariation: A Review
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Mata,André
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0874-20492016000100006
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Portuguesa de Psicologia (APP)
Edições Colibri
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Psicologia v.30 n.1 2016
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Judgment
Covariation
Contingency
Motivated reasoning
dc.title.fl_str_mv Judgment of Covariation: A Review
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
description This paper reviews a selection of influential studies on judgment of covariation in order to examine how accurate people's covariation judgments are in general, and how sophisticated are the reasoning strategies that they use to make those judgments. Very different answers have been given to these questions, depending on several factors, including the method that is used to assess people's performance on these tasks, and the motivation that people have to reach certain conclusions. It is argued that, although people are often quite poor at judging covariation, they are flexible in the reasoning strategies that they use to do so, and they have the potential to use sophisticated strategies and make accurate judgments when certain conditions are met.
dirty 0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
format article
id scielopt_7eaeb69c281dbd5ce3355c62aedb4675
identifier.url.fl_str_mv http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0874-20492016000100006
instacron_str SciELO
institution Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia
instname_str Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia
language eng
network_acronym_str scielopt
network_name_str SciELO Portugal
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0874-20492016000100006
organization_str_mv urn:organizationAcronym:scielo
person_str_mv Mata,André
publishDate 2016
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Associação Portuguesa de Psicologia (APP)
Edições Colibri
reponame_str SciELO Portugal
repository_id_str urn:repositoryAcronym:scielopt
service_str_mv urn:repositoryAcronym:scielopt
spelling Judgment of Covariation: A ReviewMata,AndréJudgmentCovariationContingencyMotivated reasoningopen accesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0874-20492016000100006URLhttp://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0874-20492016000100006URLHasVersion2016-01-01This paper reviews a selection of influential studies on judgment of covariation in order to examine how accurate people's covariation judgments are in general, and how sophisticated are the reasoning strategies that they use to make those judgments. Very different answers have been given to these questions, depending on several factors, including the method that is used to assess people's performance on these tasks, and the motivation that people have to reach certain conclusions. It is argued that, although people are often quite poor at judging covariation, they are flexible in the reasoning strategies that they use to do so, and they have the potential to use sophisticated strategies and make accurate judgments when certain conditions are met.Associação Portuguesa de Psicologia (APP)Edições ColibriPsicologia v.30 n.1 2016text/htmlengjournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501literature
spellingShingle Judgment of Covariation: A Review
Mata,André
Judgment
Covariation
Contingency
Motivated reasoning
status SINGLETON
subject.fl_str_mv Judgment
Covariation
Contingency
Motivated reasoning
title Judgment of Covariation: A Review
title_full Judgment of Covariation: A Review
title_fullStr Judgment of Covariation: A Review
title_full_unstemmed Judgment of Covariation: A Review
title_short Judgment of Covariation: A Review
title_sort Judgment of Covariation: A Review
topic Judgment
Covariation
Contingency
Motivated reasoning
topic_facet Judgment
Covariation
Contingency
Motivated reasoning
url http://scielo.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0874-20492016000100006
visible 1