[
home |
resume |
contact |
science |
art |
personal |
email
]
Schoenherr, J., Thomson, R. &, Davies, J. (2011).
What makes an explanation believable?: Mechanistic and anthropomorphic explanations of natural phenomena.
The Thirty-Third Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (COGSCI-11),
1424--1429.
Cite this for:
- People tend to prefer mechanistic explanations to anthropomorphic explanations.
Publisher:
BibTex Entry:
@InProceedings{SchoenherrThomsonDavies2011,
author = {Schoenherr, Jordan, and Thomson, Robert, and Davies, Jim},
title = {Expanding the Space of Cognitive Science: Proceedings of the 33rdAnnual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society},
pages = {1424-1429},
year = {2011},
address= {Boston, MA}
}
Download: [
PDF ]
Abstract
Many biases in decision-making and reasoning are a
result of ignoring logical rules and relevant information
while focusing on irrelevant cues present within an
argument. In the present study we examine explanatory
schemata – a set of interrelated concepts - that are
deemed relevant to participants. Participants were first
trained in a syllogistic reasoning task and were then
presented descriptions of natural phenomena and
explanations. An instructional manipulation varied the
source of the explanations (scientists or people) as well
as the animacy of the natural phenomena (living or
nonliving). Explanations used either mechanistic (e.g.,
force) or anthropomorphic (e.g., wants) terms. We
found that participants were more accurate when
assessing mechanistic explanations.
Back to Jim Davies's list of
publications.
JimDavies
(
jim@jimdavies.org
)