Rights statement: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=BSS The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34 (5), pp 270-271 2011, © 2011 Cambridge University Press.
Final published version, 669 KB, PDF document
Available under license: None
Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Editorial › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Editorial › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Normative benchmarks are useful for studying individual differences in reasoning
AU - Stupple, Edward J. N.
AU - Ball, Linden J.
N1 - http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=BBS The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34 (5), pp 270-271 2011, © 2011 Cambridge University Press.
PY - 2011/10
Y1 - 2011/10
N2 - We applaud many aspects of Elqayam & Evans' (E&E's) call for a descriptivist research programme in studying reasoning. Nevertheless, we contend that normative benchmarks are vital for understanding individual differences in performance. We argue that the presence of normative responses to particular problems by certain individuals should inspire researchers to look for converging evidence for analytic processing that may have a normative basis.
AB - We applaud many aspects of Elqayam & Evans' (E&E's) call for a descriptivist research programme in studying reasoning. Nevertheless, we contend that normative benchmarks are vital for understanding individual differences in performance. We argue that the presence of normative responses to particular problems by certain individuals should inspire researchers to look for converging evidence for analytic processing that may have a normative basis.
U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X11000562
DO - 10.1017/S0140525X11000562
M3 - Editorial
VL - 34
SP - 270
EP - 271
JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences
JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences
SN - 0140-525X
IS - 5
ER -