Corrigendum: ‘If’ and the problems of conditional reasoning [Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13 (2009), 282–287]

@article{Byrne2009CorrigendumA,
  title={Corrigendum: ‘If’ and the problems of conditional reasoning 
 [Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13 (2009), 282–287]
},
  author={Ruth M. J. Byrne and Philip N. Johnson-Laird},
  journal={Trends in Cognitive Sciences},
  year={2009},
  volume={13}
}
Due to a typesetting error, the final line of the text in Box 3 (Suppositional theories and the probability of conditionals), page 284, was omitted. The final sentence in its entirety should read: ‘You represent the strength of your belief as a numerical conditional probability.’ We apologize to the authors and readers of this article for this error. 
Probability in reasoning: A developmental test on conditionals
TLDR
It is argued that the modified mental model theory can account for the development of truth-value judgements observed in previous studies with traditional truth-table tasks and for the findings related with the probability task, which do not support the probabilistic approach of human reasoning over alternative theories. Expand
The relevance effect and conditionals
More than a decade of research has found strong evidence for P(if A, then C)=P(C|A) ("the Equation"). We argue, however, that this hypothesis provides an overly simplified picture due to itsExpand
The Theory of the Formal Discipline and the Possible Interpretations of Conditionals: Material Versus Defective Conditionals
Attridge and Inglis try to check whether or not the ‘Theory of Formal Discipline’ is correct. This theory states that learning mathematics improves logical reasoning, and Attridge and Inglis reviewExpand
The acquisition of Boolean concepts
TLDR
It is argued that the simplest explanation - the number of mental models required to represent a concept - provides a powerful account of the process in full. Expand
Deontic logic and adaptive algorithms: The relevance of explicit benefit in versions of the selection task
TLDR
It is concluded that although the experiment by Cosmides, Barrett and Tooby does show that the idea of deontic logic is questionable, it does not really demonstrate that social contract theory is the correct one. Expand
The Regulative and the Theoretical in Epistemology1
a 2004 – 2014