Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRobustelli, Briana
dc.date.accessioned2010-05-22T13:52:06Z
dc.date.available2010-05-22T13:52:06Z
dc.date.issued2010-05-22T13:52:06Z
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1813/15030
dc.description.abstractNo explanation is perfect. There are usually data that are anomalous to an explanation. We investigated two variables, resolving an anomaly and supporting an explanation, that make strong vs. weak anomalies more or less problematic for an explanation. Participants were given an explanation and an anomaly and then were asked to generate or were given someone else’s resolution to an anomaly or support for an explanation. Results showed that in certain conditions hearing about rather than generating information made the anomalies seem less problematic for the explanation. Determining the subtle relationship between these variables is important in understanding what shapes everyday reasoning.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.subjectScientific Thinkingen_US
dc.subjectExplanationen_US
dc.subjectAnomalyen_US
dc.subjectConfirmation Biasen_US
dc.titleWhen the Pieces Do Not Quite Fit: The Role of Anomalous Information in Evaluating Explanationsen_US
dc.typedissertation or thesisen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Statistics