Description

 New Paradigm

• Baratgin, J., & Politzer, G. (in press). Logic, probability and inference: a methodology for a new paradigm. In Cognitive Unconscious and Human Rationality. L. Macchi, M. Bagassi et R. Viale (Ed.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pdf
• Elqayam, S., & Over, D. E. (2013). New paradigm psychology of reasoning: An introduction to the special issue edited by Elqayam, Bonnefon, and Over. Thinking and Reasoning, 19, 249265. pdf
• Evans, J. St. B. T. (2012). Questions ad challenges for the new psychology of reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning, 18, 531. pdf
• Evans, J. St. B. T., & Over, D. E. (2013). Reasoning to and from belief: Deduction and induction are still distinct. Thinking and Reasoning, 19, 267283. pdf
• Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (2007). Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (2009). Precis of Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 69-84. pdf
• Over, D. E. (2009). New paradigm psychology of reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning, 15, 431-438. pdf

Level1: Epistemic level

• Baratgin, J., Over, D.  E., & Politzer, G. (2014). New Psychological Paradigm for Conditionals: Its philosophy and psychology. Mind & Language, 29, 73-84. pdf
• Baratgin, J., Over, D. E., & Politzer, G. (2013). Uncertainty and de Finetti tables, Thinking & Reasoning, 19, 308-328. pdf
• Pfeifer, N., & Kleiter, G. D. (2009). Framing human inference by coherence based probability logic. Journal of Applied Logic, 7, 206217. pdf
• Wijnbergen‐Huitink, J., Elqayam, S., & Over, D.E. (2015). The Probability of Iterated Conditionals. Cognitive Science, 39, 788-803. pdf

Level2: Epistemic level

Equation

• Cruz, N. & Oberauer, K. (2014). Comparing the meanings of “if” and “ all”. Memory and Cognition, 42, 13451356. pdf
• Evans, J. St. B. T., & Over, D. E. (2004). If. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Pfeifer, N., & Kleiter, G. D. (2010). The conditional in mental probability logic. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (Eds.), Cognition and conditionals (pp. 153173). Oxford: Oxford University Press. pdf
• *Politzer, G., Over, D. E., & Baratgin, J. (2010). Betting on conditionals. Thinking and Reasoning, 16, 172-197. pdf (matériel)

Deduction under uncertainty

• Cruz, N., Baratgin, J., Oaksford, M. & Over, D. E. (2015). Bayesian reasoning with ifs and ands and ors. Frontiers in Psychology,  6:192. pdf
• Evans, J. St. B. T., Thompson, V., & Over, D. E. (2015). Uncertain deduction and conditional reasoning. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 398. pdf
• George, C. (1997). Reasoning from uncertain premises. Thinking and Reasoning, 3, 161189. pdf
• Pfeifer, N. (2014). Reasoning about uncertain conditionals. Studia Logica, 8, 118. pdf
• Pfeifer, N., & Kleiter, G. D. (2006a). Inference in conditional probability logic. Kybernetika, 42, 391-404. pdf
• Pfeifer, N., & Kleiter, G. D. (2011). Uncertain deductive reasoning. In K. Manktelow, D. Over,& S. Elqayam(Eds.), The science of reason (pp. 145166). Hove: Psychology Press. pdf
• Politzer, G. (in press). Deductive reasoning under uncertainty: A water tank analogy. Erkenntnis. pdf
• Politzer, G., & Baratgin, J. (in press). Deductive schemas with uncertain premisses using qualitative probability expressions. Thinking & Reasoning. pdf
• Singmann, H., Klauer, K. C., & Over, D. E. (2014). New normative standards of conditional reasoning and the dual-source model. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 316. pdf.

Probability Judgment

Revision context

• Baratgin, J. (2009). Updating our beliefs about inconsistency: The Monty-Hall case. Mathematical Social Sciences, 57, 67-95. pdf
• Baratgin, J. (2015). Rationality, the Bayesian standpoint, and the Monty-Hall problem. New frontiers in Psychology, 6:1168. pdf
• *Baratgin, J., Liang, K., Stilgenbauer, J.-L., & Jouen, F. (June 2014). Contexte d’actualisation et équation : Un nouvel argumant par l’Eye Tracking. ERIS 2014, cité des Sciences, Paris. Résumé.pdf, diapos.pdf
• Curley,  S. P., & Golden,  J. I. (1994). Using belief functions to represent degree of belief. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,  58, 271-303. pdf
• Douven, I., & Schupbach, J. N. (2015a). The Role of Explanatory Considerations in Updating. Cognition, 142, 299-311. pdf
• Douven, I., & Schupbach, J. N. (2015b). Probabilistic Alternatives to Bayesianism: The Case of Explanationism, Frontiers in Psychology 6:459. html
• Dubois, D., & Prade, H. (1992). Evidence, knowledge, and belief functions. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 6, 295–319. pdf
• Robinson, L. B., & Hastie, R. (1985). Revision of beliefs when a hypothesis is eliminated from consideration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 443-456. pdf
• Walliser, B., & Zwirn, D. (2002). Can Bayes’ rule be justified by cognitive rationality principles? Theory and Decision, 53, 95–135. pdf
• *Walliser, B., & Zwirn, D. (2011). Change rules for hierarchical beliefs. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 52, 156-163. pdf
• Van Wallendael, L., & Hastie, R. (1990). Tracing the footsteps of sherlock holmes: Cognitive representations of hypothesis testing. Memory & Cognition, 18, 240–250. pdf
• Zhao, J., Crupi, V., Tentori, K., Fitelson, B., and Osherson, D. (2012). Updating: Learning versus Supposing. Cognition, 124, 373-378. pdf

  Looking At Nothing Methodology

• *Ferreira, F., Apel, A. & Henderson, J. M. (2008). Taking a new look at looking at nothing. Trends In Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 405-410. pdf
• *Renkewitz, F., & Jahn, G. (2012). Memory Indexing: A Novel Method for Tracing Memory Processes in Complex Cognitive Tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(6), 1622-1639. pdf
• *Jahn, G., & Braatz, J. (2014). Memory indexing of sequential symptom processing in diagnostic reasoning. Cognitive Psychology, 68, 59-97. pdf
• *Scholz, A., von Helversen, B.,  & Rieskamp, J. (2015). Eye movements reveal memory processes during similarity- and rule-based decision making. Cognition, 136, 228-246. pdf

  Pupil dilatation

• Hess, E. H., & J Polt, J. M. (1964). Pupil Size in Relation to Mental Activity during Simple Problem-Solving, Science 13 ,  vol. 143 no. 3611, 1190-1193. pdf
• *Goldinger, S. D., & Papesh, M. H. (2012) Pupil dilation reflects the creation and retrieval of memories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 90 -95. pdf
• Murphy, P. R., Vandekerckhove, J., & Nieuwenhuis, S. (2014). Pupil-Linked Arousal Determines Variability in Perceptual Decision Making. PLoS Computational Biology,  10 (9). pdf
• Poock, G. K. (1973). Information proceessing vs pupil diameter. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 37,  1000-1002. pdf
• Rieger, G., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (2012). The Eyes Have It: Sex and Sexual Orientation Differences in Pupil Dilation Patterns, PLoS ONE. 7(8). pdf