SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Reasoning”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

PubMed2006

Using dual-process theory and analogical transfer to explain facilitation on a hypothetico-deductive reasoning task.

Using the analogical transfer paradigm, the present study investigated the competing explanations of Girotto and Legrenzi (Psychological Research 51: 129-135, 1993) and Griggs, Platt, Newstead, and Jackson (Thinking and Reasoning 4: 1-14, 1998) for facilitation on the SARS version of the THOG problem, a hypothetico-deductive reasoning task. Girotto and Legrenzi argue that facilitation is based on logical analysis of the task [System 2 reasoning in Evans's (Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7: 454-459, 2003) dual-process account of reasoning] while Griggs et al. maintain that facilitation is due to an attentional heuristic produced by the wording of the problem (System 1 reasoning). If Girotto and Legrenzi are correct, then System 2 reasoning, which is volitional and responsible for deductive reasoning, should be elicited, and participants should comprehend the solution principle of the THOG task and exhibit analogical transfer. However, if Griggs et al. are correct, then System 1 reasoning, which is responsible for heuristic problem solving strategies such as an attentional heuristic, should occur, and participants should not abstract the solution principle and transfer should not occur. Significant facilitation (68 and 82% correct) was only observed for the two SARS source problems, but significant analogical transfer did not occur. This lack of transfer suggests that System 1 reasoning was responsible for the facilitation observed in the SARS problem, supporting Griggs et al.'s attentional heuristic explanation. The present results also underscore the explanatory value of using analogical transfer rather than facilitation as the criterion for problem understanding.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Accountability for reasonableness: opening the black box of process.

Norman Daniels' and James Sabin's theory of "accountability for reasonableness" (A4R) is a much discussed account of due process for decision-making on health care priority setting. Central to the theory is the acceptance that people may justifiably disagree on what reasons it is relevant to consider when priorities are made, but that there is a core set of reasons, that all centre on fairness, on which there will be no disagreement. A4R is designed as an institutional decision process which will ensure that only those reasons which everybody will agree are relevant and appropriate form part of decision-making. The argument which we will put forward in this paper questions whether it is a simple matter to delineate the core set of reasons and claims that it is a potential problem in A4R that it does not provide an indication of the exact content of this process. The paper first briefly outlines the content of A4R. It is argued that disagreement on what services should be high priorities cannot be resolved solely with a reference to "due process." In order to retain consistency over time, decision-makers are required to agree and articulate what reasons qualify as relevant and how conflicting reasons are to be balanced in the course of the process. The second and main part of the paper then considers how the reason of "solidarity" can be handled within the A4R framework, and it is shown that deciding whether solidarity should be admitted to the core set of allowable reasons is not a simple matter.

Bioethics↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Reasoning, decision making and rationality.

It is argued that reasoning in the real world supports decision making and is aimed at the achievement of goals. A distinction is developed between two notions of rationality: rationality which is reasoning in such a way as to achieve one's goals--within cognitive constraints--and rationality which is reasoning by a process of logic. This dichotomy is related to the philosophical distinction between practical and theoretical reasoning. It is argued that logicality (rationality) does not provide a good basis for rationality and some psychological research on deductive reasoning is re-examined in this light. First, we review belief bias effects in syllogistic reasoning, and argue that the phenomena do not support the interpretations of irrationality that are often placed upon them. Second, we review and discuss recent studies of deontic reasoning in the Wason selection task, which demonstrate the decision making, and rational nature of reasoning in realistic contexts. The final section of the paper examines contemporary decision theory and shows how it fails, in comparable manner to formal logic, to provide an adequate model for assessing the rationality of human reasoning and decision making.

Cognition↗

PubMed2004

From models to rules: mechanization of reasoning as a way to cope with cognitive overloading in combinatorial problems.

It is hypothesized that the transition from unfamiliar problems to familiar, well-learned problems coincides with the transition from a model-based style of reasoning to a rule-based style of reasoning; model-based style of reasoning helps understanding the problem structure, but can overload working memory when the number of models required increases; rule-based style of reasoning avoids cognitive overloading, at the cost of making individuals liable to mechanization errors. In Experiment 1, the number of models required to respond to a verification task affected response latencies with unfamiliar problems, but not with familiar problems, supporting the initial hypothesis. In Experiment 2, participants were prone to mechanization errors when confronted with slightly modified problems in the late stages of the experiment, supporting the hypothesis that they had developed a reasoning rule in the early stages and were blindly applying it. The findings suggest that model-based reasoning and rule-based reasoning serve different purposes and have different costs and benefits, are both available to human reasoners, and familiarization with a problem may induce the transition from the former to the latter. The findings also suggest that mechanization of reasoning may be the first step along a gradient of decreasing cognitive load, whose end-point is automatization, as discussed in theories of automatization of information processing.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

PubMed2006

Reasonable suspicion: a pilot study of pediatric residents.

OBJECTIVES: To identify pediatric residents' understanding and interpretation of reasonable suspicion, in the context of mandated reporting of suspected child abuse. METHOD: A survey was administered to pediatrics and combined medicine/pediatrics residents. An open-ended question plus three operational frameworks for interpreting likelihood examined how residents conceived of reasonable suspicion. Responses were examined for evidence of a group standard, and also compared for internal consistency. RESULTS: Forty-two of 49 residents completed the survey (86% response rate). There were no significant differences in responses based on age, gender, year of residency, or anticipated practice type. Respondents exhibited wide variation in the thresholds they set for reasonable suspicion. On a Differential Diagnosis scale, 10% indicated that "abuse" would have to rank 1st or 2nd; 45% set the threshold at 3rd or 4th; while 45% stated that abuse could be as low as 5th to 10th and still qualify as reasonable suspicion. Using a Estimated Probability scale, 9.5% indicated that "abuse" would need to be >75% likely before reasonable suspicion existed; 28.5% stated that a 60-70% likelihood was needed; 38% identified the necessary likelihood as 40-50%; and 24% set the threshold as low as 10-35%. In comparing individual resident responses for the two scales, 83.3% were internally inconsistent. CONCLUSION: There was no consensus among pediatric residents with regard to (1) a standard meaning for reasonable suspicion, (2) a standard application of reasonable suspicion, or (3) how likely "abuse" must be before reasonable suspicion can be said to exist. Additionally, many residents' conceptions of reasonable suspicion were internally inconsistent.

Adult↗

PubMed2006

Changes in adolescents' reasons for drinking in Switzerland and associations with alcohol use from 1994 to 2002.

PURPOSE: To determine changes in the prevalence of reasons for drinking and their associations with alcohol use among adolescents in Switzerland from 1994 to 2002. METHOD: Based on national representative samples of 3792 alcohol-using students in 8th and 9th grades in Switzerland (mean age 15.5 years, SD .7), chi-square tests were used to determine changes in reasons for drinking over time. To determine associations between reasons and alcohol use and changes in these associations over time, multiple regression models were estimated separately for the frequency of alcohol consumption and drunkenness. RESULTS: Most adolescents reported drinking to celebrate special occasions, because they wanted to try alcohol, or because they liked the taste of alcoholic drinks. From 1994 to 2002, an increase in all reasons was observed. In multiple regressions, nearly all reasons were significantly related to alcohol consumption and drunkenness. With two exceptions, no interaction with the study year was found. Furthermore, the number of reasons cited by the adolescents surveyed is important: the more reasons they indicated, the more often they drank. The highest alcohol use in 2002 was found among adolescents who indicated all or nearly all reasons, a group that did not exist in 1994. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a new group of adolescents who indicated a high number of different reasons for drinking, who often consumed alcohol, and who were frequently drunk. Prevention approaches should be especially targeted at this new risk group.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1998

Reasons for culling in French Holstein cows.

The study describes the profiles of culled cows in order to assess the possible contribution to economic losses due to health disorders. Data regarding dates of birth, final calving and culling, parity at culling, milk yield at the two first test-days of the final lactation and reason(s) for culling were collected in a 5-year survey, carried out from 1989 to 1994 in 84 commercial Holstein farms in western France. Polytomous logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between parity, calving-to-culling interval, milk yield and eight groups of primary culling reasons (i.e. udder disorders; infertility or reproductive disorders; lameness or foot/leg defects; emergency culling reasons; other health disorders; low milk yield; sales for dairy purpose; and other voluntary culling reasons). Out of a total of 5133 culled cows, the proportions of culls, for each of these groups of reasons, were 12.4, 28.4, 2.7, 3.9, 4.6, 16.7, 5.9, and 25.4%, respectively. Cows culled for udder disorders left the herd earlier in lactation and were more frequently at parities 4-6 than cows culled for voluntary reasons. In contrast, cows culled for infertility were younger and culled later within lactation. They were also higher yielding cows than those culled for other reasons. Cows culled for lameness were similar to those of the voluntarily culling group. Cows culled for emergency reasons were more frequently younger cows in early lactation. Cows culled for other health disorders left the herd early in lactation, but at a higher parity than the voluntarily culled cows. These results suggest that most of the culls related to health could be contributing to economic loss. However, special priority should be given to reduce culling for reproductive problems, which is the most costly exit reason.

Animals↗

PubMed1998

Reasons for nonattendance for the treatment of venous ulcers in an inner-city clinic.

PURPOSE: This study examined the reasons that people attending an inner-city wound clinic gave for missing appointments and compared these reasons with those of people who did not have chronic wounds. METHODS: Thirty-six patients with venous ulcers and 115 people without leg ulcers responded to a survey that queried the reasons for missing clinic appointments. Consecutive sampling was used to obtain participants. The Clinic Attendance Questionnaire was developed for the study and consisted of a demographic section and the Reasons for Nonattendance Questionnaire, which has 45 Yes/No items. Items in the Reasons for Nonattendance Questionnaire were sorted by the investigators into 5 subscores (Personal, Clinic Problem, Illness, Mental Health, and Social). Questionnaires were read to participants. Data were not collected from patients who kept all appointments or from new patients. RESULTS: The primary reasons that patients seeking wound care gave for missing appointments were no ride, no money, out of town, forgot, and in too much pain. People with leg ulcers had significantly more Social, Illness, Personal, and Total reasons, but fewer Clinic Problem reasons, for missing appointments than did the people without leg ulcers. The two groups did not differ in their rating of health, importance of health, or age. Most of the people with leg ulcers had a history of illicit drug abuse. CONCLUSIONS: Nonattendance for clinic appointments may delay healing of venous ulcers and decrease the efficiency of the clinic. Reasons for missing wound clinic appointments are numerous and may vary with the patient's condition and background.

Adult↗

PubMed1996

Reasons for depression and the process and outcome of cognitive-behavioral psychotherapies.

This study examined the relationships between clients' reasons for depression and the process and outcome of a cognitive therapy (CT) and a behavioral activation (BA) treatment for major depression. Reason giving was conceptualized as the tendency to offer multiple explanations for a problem. Different reasons for depression were also thought to match or mismatch the theoretical model underlying each treatment. Reasons for depression were assessed pretreatment with a previously developed questionnaire. Process variables including homework compliance and perceived treatment helpfulness were measured early in treatment. Results demonstrated that perceived helpfulness of the treatment was associated with positive outcomes in BA. Reason giving was associated with worse outcomes in BA. Specific reasons also predicted differential outcome in the 2 treatments. Clients who endorsed existential reasons for depression had better outcomes in CT and worse outcomes in BA. Relationship-oriented reasons were consistently associated with negative process and outcome in CT. Results are discussed in terms of the function of reason giving and the role of specific explanations for depression in treatment process and outcome.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Reasoning, integration, inference alteration, and text comprehension.

This paper reports how the study of formal logical reasoning provides insight into more everyday types of reasoning, such as that involved in language comprehension. Both of these types of cognition are thought to involve the use of mental models, and so it is reasonable to think that the cognitive operations needed for formal logical reasoning would be involved in everyday reasoning as well. We focused on three aspects of formal reasoning: (a) the integration of information into a common mental model, (b) the drawing of inferences, and (c) the coordination of alternative possibilities. We were able to show that the integration and inference components were related to narrative comprehension processes, but the coordination of alternative models was not. Thus, there is evidence for some overlap in the mental processes used in formal and everyday reasoning. This further justifies the study of formal logical reasoning as a window into certain types of everyday reasoning.

Analysis of Variance↗

PubMed1987

The relationship between physical and social reasoning in adolescents.

The relationship between physical reasoning and interpersonal reasoning was examined by devising group-administered written measures of interpersonal reasoning tasks (social guessing games) and giving these and standard physical reasoning tasks to 11-year-old children (N = 106). A factor analysis revealed two factors: Physical reasoning accounted for 42% of the variance, and social reasoning accounted for 17% of the variance. This supports the proposition that social reasoning is distinct from physical reasoning, but performance on all reasoning tasks may depend upon structures of both types.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1992

Clinical reasoning in manual therapy.

Clinical reasoning refers to the cognitive process or thinking used in the evaluation and management of a patient. In this article, clinical reasoning research and expert-novice studies are examined to provide insight into the growing understanding of clinical reasoning and the nature of expertise. Although hypothetico-deductive methods of reasoning are used by clinicians at all levels of experience, experts appear to possess a superior organization of knowledge. Experts often reach a diagnosis based on pure pattern recognition of clinical patterns. With an atypical problem, however, the expert, like the novice, appears to rely more on hypothetico-deductive clinical reasoning. Five categories of hypotheses are proposed for physical therapists using a hypothetico-deductive method of clinical reasoning. A model of the clinical reasoning process for physical therapists is presented to bring attention to the hypothesis generation, testing, and modification that I feel should take place through all aspects of the patient encounter. Examples of common errors in clinical reasoning are highlighted, and suggestions for facilitating clinical reasoning in our students are made.

Bias↗

PubMed2006

'Simply forgot' is the most frequently stated reason for missed doses of HAART irrespective of degree of adherence.

OBJECTIVES: Previous studies have reported that forgetfulness is the most frequently mentioned reason for missed doses among patients on highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). However, no previous study has compared the reasons given by highly nonadherent patients with the reasons given by patients with better adherence. The objective of this study was to examine further patients' self-reported reasons for missing doses of HAART and to compare the reasons given by patients with lower adherence with those given by patients with higher adherence. METHODS: All patients visiting the clinics participating in the Danish HIV cohort study during a 1-year period (July 2002 to June 2003) were eligible if they had started HAART at least 6 months previously. Consenting patients completed an anonymous self-administered questionnaire based upon the adult AIDS Clinical Trial Group adherence questionnaires. Lower adherence was defined as reporting a missed dose within the preceding 4 days. RESULTS: We received usable questionnaires from 840 (75%) of the 1126 eligible patients. Patients with lower adherence reported the same reasons for missed doses as patients with higher adherence (Spearman's rho=0.952, P<0.0001). In both groups of patients the three most frequently reported reasons for missed doses were 'simply forgot', 'were away from home', and 'had a change in daily routines'. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with poorer adherence to HAART state the same reasons for missing doses as patients with better adherence, and 'simply forgot' is the most frequently stated reason.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1998

Politics, moral reasoning and the Defining Issues Test: a reply to Barnett et al. (1995).

Previous research has consistently shown that those on the political Right tend to prefer or use conventional or Stage 4 moral reasoning, while those on the political Left prefer principled or Stage 5 reasoning (cf. Kohlberg, 1976). One interpretation of this finding is that developmental level of moral reasoning influences a person's political views, another that the moral 'stages' associated with contrasting political positions are in fact contrasting politico-moral ideologies and that people choose the form of moral reasoning which best expresses their own political identity. We report four studies to test aspects of these alternatives. Participants (N = 50) in Study 1 rated moral arguments representing different stages as differentially relevant to people of varying political persuasions. In Study 2, participants (N = 106), assigned to play the role of constituency political parties (either Labour or Conservative) selecting candidates to represent their party, evaluated imaginary candidates differentially as a function of the kinds of moral arguments the candidates expressed. In Study 3 (N = 61), principled and particularly conventional moral arguments were again found to express contrasting political identities. In Study 4 (N = 51) a manipulation of the salience of participants' political identity produced as predicted high correlations between moral reasoning scores and measures of political attitudes when political identity was salient but not when personal identity was salient. The findings overall, however, only partially support the view that political identity influences moral reasoning. We conclude that, although degree of preference for conventional or Stage 4 reasoning is a function of political identity, principled reasoning may be unrelated to political orientation. We also propose that these two forms of reasoning do not reflect successive development stages and that preference for one may be independent of preference for the other.

Adult↗

PubMed2001

Referral for menstrual problems: cross sectional survey of symptoms, reasons for referral, and management.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the menstrual experience of women referred for menstrual problems, in particular menorrhagia (excessive menstrual loss), and to assess associations with reasons for referral given by their general practitioners, the women's understanding of the reasons for their attendance at the hospital clinics, and clinic outcome. DESIGN: Questionnaire survey, with partial review of case notes after 8 months. SETTING: Three hospital gynaecology clinics in Glasgow and Edinburgh. PARTICIPANTS: 952 women completed the questionnaire, and the first 665 were reviewed. OUTCOME MEASURES: Reason for referral, women's reported menstrual problems and reason for clinic attendance, diagnosis, and treatment. RESULTS: Only 38% (95% confidence interval 34% to 41%) of women reported excessive menstrual loss as a severe problem. However 60% (57-63%) gave it as reason for attending a clinic, and 76% (73-79%) of general practitioners gave it as reason for referral. Reason for referral was significantly biased towards bleeding (McNemar odds ratio 4.01, 3.0 to 5.3, P<0.001) and against pain (0.54, 0.4 to 0.7, P<0.001). Dysfunctional uterine bleeding was diagnosed in 37% (31-42%) of the 259 women who gave as reason for attendance something other than bleeding. Women who were economically disadvantaged differed in prevalence of the main diagnoses and were more likely to fail to reattend. Hysterectomy was associated with referral for bleeding (relative risk 4.9, 1.6 to 15.6, P<0.001) but not with the patient stating bleeding as the reason for clinic attendance. CONCLUSIONS: Intolerance of the volume of their bleeding is not a key feature among women attending clinics for bleeding problems. Broad menstrual complaint tends to be reframed as excessive bleeding at referral and during management. This may result in women receiving inappropriate care. Conceptualisation and assessment of menorrhagia requires reconsideration.

Adult↗

PubMed1982

Moral reasoning and decisions in dilemmas of neonatal care.

The relationship between levels of moral reasoning and decisions in dilemmas of neonatal care was investigated in a sample of 452 pediatricians. Subjects included residents, faculty members, and practitioners recruited from a variety of university-affiliated and community hospitals. It was hypothesized that physicians whose moral reasoning was more fully developed would less actively treat particular cases. Such cases might include those where a patient's family requested such a limit (designated "negative family attitude") or the quality of life likely to be led after therapy was so low as to preclude even a minimal degree of human activity or social interaction (designated "unsalvageable prognosis"). The hypothesis was tested through the use of two questionnaires. The first questionnaire, devised by Crane, assessed the physician's reported degree of activism in treating six cases of infants born with severe defects. The structure of moral reasoning was measured by a second questionnaire, Rest's Defining Issue Test. Subjects were scored by the degree to which they use universal, ethical principles in resolving a series of moral dilemmas. Results of the absolute level of activism (Table 1) showed that among both residents and postresidents, the degree to which cases are actively treated depends, for salvageable patients, on the type of damage and on the possibility for research. Results involving moral reasoning showed a different pattern among residents and postresidents. Among residents, a significant correlation exists between principled reasoning and the absence of active treatment (r = - 0.41, Form A; r = - 0.23, Form B). As predicted, such correlations were strongest for cases of negative family attitude or of unsalvageable prognosis. The pattern of correlations among postresidents showed either no relationship to moral reasoning or the reverse of the residency pattern (r = -0.08, Form A; r = 0.30, Form B). The influence of the type of institution a resident operates within was assessed by analysis of variance. Inasmuch as moral reasoning and institutional type both had significant main effects (Form A), their magnitude differed. Institutional type accounted for 43% of the variation in mean activism scores whereas moral reasoning accounted for only 4%; however, because one could, a priori, expect institutional norms and customs to be powerful determinants of behavior, any additional, identifiable influence deserves attention. The structure of individuals' moral reasoning seems to be such an influence.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed1998

A summary of the reasons why farmers cull cows.

A study was conducted to determine why cows are culled, whether cows are culled for multiple reasons, and whether farm characteristics can help explain why cows are culled. The primary reasons for culling were reproduction (i.e., failure to conceive), mastitis, and low production. For 35% of all cows that were culled, a secondary reason for culling was assigned by the farmer, and, for 11% of all cows that were culled, a tertiary reason was recorded. Using a weighting factor of 5:3:1 (primary:secondary:tertiary reasons for culling), a culling score was computed for each reason within a herd. Reproduction was the primary reason for culling, production was second, and mastitis was third. Much variation existed as to why dairy farmers culled cows. Computed mean culling scores suggested that culling for mastitis was lower in high producing Holstein herds, and culling for abortion was higher in high producing Holstein herds. Culling for reproduction was higher in high producing Holstein herds, and culling for production was lower in high producing Holstein herds. Culling for mastitis and production were significantly lower in high producing Holstein herds than in non-Holstein herds. A system that allows the documentation of multiple reasons for culling and the computation of a composite score appears to be reasonable for the assessment of culling management.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

Syllogistic reasoning time: disconfirmation disconfirmed.

Models of deductive reasoning typically assume that reasoners dedicate more logical analysis to unbelievable conclusions than to believable ones (e.g., Evans, Newstead, Allen, & Pollard, 1994; Newstead, Pollard, Evans, & Allen, 1992). When the conclusion is believable, reasoners are assumed to accept it without much further thought, but when it is unbelievable, they are assumed to analyze the conclusion, presumably in an attempt to disconfirm it. This disconfirmation hypothesis leads to two predictions, which were tested in the present experiment: Reasoners should take longer to reason about problems leading to unbelievable conclusions, and reasoners should consider more models or representations of premise information for unbelievable conclusions than for believable ones. Neither prediction was supported by our data. Indeed, we observed that reasoners took significantly longer to reason about believable conclusions than about unbelievable ones and generated the same number of representations regardless of the believability of the premises. We propose a model, based on a modified version of verbal reasoning theory (Polk & Newell, 1995), that does not depend on the disconfirmation assumption.

Adolescent↗