Christian Gaviria

We don’t have enough information about this author to calculate their statistics. If you think this is an error let us know.
Learn More
Plausible reasoning has been proposed as an alternative to deductive and inductive norms of argument evaluation in informal logic. In this paper, we present the first systematic empirical contrast between the Bayesian account of argumentation and a plausible reasoning model. Results suggest that the Bayesian approach to argumentation provides a more precise(More)
There is not yet a clear agreement about the functional differences between the processing of mechanism versus covariation information in causal judgments. It has been shown recently that causal belief updating does not depend on the information's origin but on the reliability of new information fed to the updating process). However, there are many aspects(More)
  • 1