Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An End to the Controversy? A Reply to Rips

  • Published:
Minds and Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Barwise, Jon (1993), ‘Everyday Reasoning and Logical Inference’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, pp. 337–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, Malcolm I., and Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1993), ‘How Diagrams Can Improve Reasoning’, Psychological Science 4, pp. 372–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, RuthM. J. (1989), ‘Suppressing Valid Inferences with Conditionals’, Cognition 31, pp. 61–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, Ruth M. J. (1991), ‘Can Valid Inferences Be Suppressed?’, Cognition 39, pp. 71–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983), Mental Models, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1997), ‘Rules and lllusions: A Critical Study of Rips's The Psychology of Proof’, Minds and Machines 7, pp. 387–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N., and Byrne, Ruth M. J. (1991), Deduction, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N.; Byrne, Ruth M. J.; and Schaeken, Walter S. (1992), ‘Propositional Reasoning by Model’, Psychological Review 99, pp. 418–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N.; Byrne, Ruth M. J.; and Schaeken, Walter S. (1994), ‘Why Models Rather than Rules Give a Better Account of Propositional Reasoning: A Reply to Bonatti, and to O'Brien, Braine, and Yang’, Psychological Review 101, pp. 734–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N., and Savary, Fabien (1996a), ‘Illusory Inferences about Probabilities’, Acta Psychologica 93: 69–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P. N., and Savary, Fabien (1996b), ‘Truth and Illusion in Reasoning’, under submission.

  • Oaksford, Michael, and Stenning, Keith (1992), ‘Reasoning with Conditionals Containing Negated Constituents’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18, pp. 835–854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Politzer, Guy, and Braine, Martin D. S. (1991), ‘Responses to Inconsistent Premises Cannot Count as Suppression of Valid Inferences’, Cognition 38, pp. 103–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rips, Lance J. (1994), ThePsychology ofProof:DeductiveReasoning in Human Thinking, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rips, Lance J. (1997), ‘Goals for a Theory of Deduction: Reply to Johnson-Laird’, Minds and Machines 7, pp. 409–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberge, J. J. (1976), ‘The Effect of Negation on Adults' Disjunctive Reasoning Abilities’, Journal of General Psychology 91, pp. 23–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, Victoria F. (1996), ‘The Cognitive Processes in Informal Reasoning’, Thinking and Reasoning 2, pp. 51–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, Stephen E. (1958), The Uses of Argument, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, 08544, USA

    Philip N. Johnson-Laird

Authors
  1. Philip N. Johnson-Laird
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson-Laird, P.N. An End to the Controversy? A Reply to Rips. Minds and Machines 7, 425–432 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008290809940

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008290809940

Keywords

Search

Navigation