Tracing current explanations in memory: A process analysis based on eye-tracking

Sequential abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. Explanations can be multicausal and require the retrieval of previously found ones from memory. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR) allows detailed predictions on what information is stored a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) 2020-10, Vol.73 (10), p.1703-1717
Hauptverfasser: Klichowicz, Anja, Strehlau, Sascha, Baumann, Martin RK, Krems, Josef F, Rosner, Agnes
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1717
container_issue 10
container_start_page 1703
container_title Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)
container_volume 73
creator Klichowicz, Anja
Strehlau, Sascha
Baumann, Martin RK
Krems, Josef F
Rosner, Agnes
description Sequential abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. Explanations can be multicausal and require the retrieval of previously found ones from memory. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR) allows detailed predictions on what information is stored and retrieved from memory during reasoning. In the research to date, however, these predictions have never been directly tested. In this study, we tested process assumptions such as the construction of a mental representation from TAR using memory indexing, an eye-tracking method that makes it possible to trace the retrieval of explanations currently held in working memory. Gaze analysis revealed that participants encode the presented evidence (i.e., observations) together with possible explanations into memory. When new observations are presented, the previously presented evidence and explanations are retrieved. Observations that are not explained immediately are encoded as abstractly explained. Abstract explanations enter a refinement process in which they become concrete before they enter the situation model. With the memory indexing method, we were able to assess the process of information retrieval in abductive reasoning, which was previously believed to be unobservable. We discuss the results in the light of TAR and other current theories on the diagnostic reasoning process.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/1747021820922509
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_1747021820922509</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1747021820922509</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2395255101</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-36e86297809b3eeede80714cf50ba84037847a331281cfe28b3a6584726070883</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtLw0AQxhdRsD7uHhe8eInOPpLdeCvFFxT0UM9hs52U1DzqTgL2v3dLRaHgaYZvft_HzDB2JeBWCGPuhNEGpLAScilTyI_YZCclIGV2_NsLe8rOiNYAWpnMTNjbIjhfdyvuxxCwGzh-bRrXuaHuO-J1x1ts-7C951O-Cb1HIh6nzZZq4qUjXPK-47jFZIg5HzHogp1UriG8_Knn7P3xYTF7TuavTy-z6TzxyuohURnaTObGQl4qRFyiBSO0r1IondWgjNXGKSWkFb5CaUvlsjRqMgMD1qpzdrPPjWt9jkhD0dbksYnLYz9SIVWeyjQVICJ6fYCu-zHEKyKltbEik2pHwZ7yoScKWBWbULcubAsBxe7FxeGLoyXZW8it8C_0X_4b4m146Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2447816231</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Tracing current explanations in memory: A process analysis based on eye-tracking</title><source>SAGE Journals</source><creator>Klichowicz, Anja ; Strehlau, Sascha ; Baumann, Martin RK ; Krems, Josef F ; Rosner, Agnes</creator><creatorcontrib>Klichowicz, Anja ; Strehlau, Sascha ; Baumann, Martin RK ; Krems, Josef F ; Rosner, Agnes</creatorcontrib><description>Sequential abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. Explanations can be multicausal and require the retrieval of previously found ones from memory. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR) allows detailed predictions on what information is stored and retrieved from memory during reasoning. In the research to date, however, these predictions have never been directly tested. In this study, we tested process assumptions such as the construction of a mental representation from TAR using memory indexing, an eye-tracking method that makes it possible to trace the retrieval of explanations currently held in working memory. Gaze analysis revealed that participants encode the presented evidence (i.e., observations) together with possible explanations into memory. When new observations are presented, the previously presented evidence and explanations are retrieved. Observations that are not explained immediately are encoded as abstractly explained. Abstract explanations enter a refinement process in which they become concrete before they enter the situation model. With the memory indexing method, we were able to assess the process of information retrieval in abductive reasoning, which was previously believed to be unobservable. We discuss the results in the light of TAR and other current theories on the diagnostic reasoning process.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1747-0218</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1747-0226</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1747021820922509</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Memory</subject><ispartof>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2020-10, Vol.73 (10), p.1703-1717</ispartof><rights>Experimental Psychology Society 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-36e86297809b3eeede80714cf50ba84037847a331281cfe28b3a6584726070883</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-36e86297809b3eeede80714cf50ba84037847a331281cfe28b3a6584726070883</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9785-9660 ; 0000-0002-0522-3989</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1747021820922509$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1747021820922509$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Klichowicz, Anja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strehlau, Sascha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baumann, Martin RK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krems, Josef F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosner, Agnes</creatorcontrib><title>Tracing current explanations in memory: A process analysis based on eye-tracking</title><title>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)</title><description>Sequential abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. Explanations can be multicausal and require the retrieval of previously found ones from memory. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR) allows detailed predictions on what information is stored and retrieved from memory during reasoning. In the research to date, however, these predictions have never been directly tested. In this study, we tested process assumptions such as the construction of a mental representation from TAR using memory indexing, an eye-tracking method that makes it possible to trace the retrieval of explanations currently held in working memory. Gaze analysis revealed that participants encode the presented evidence (i.e., observations) together with possible explanations into memory. When new observations are presented, the previously presented evidence and explanations are retrieved. Observations that are not explained immediately are encoded as abstractly explained. Abstract explanations enter a refinement process in which they become concrete before they enter the situation model. With the memory indexing method, we were able to assess the process of information retrieval in abductive reasoning, which was previously believed to be unobservable. We discuss the results in the light of TAR and other current theories on the diagnostic reasoning process.</description><subject>Memory</subject><issn>1747-0218</issn><issn>1747-0226</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kMtLw0AQxhdRsD7uHhe8eInOPpLdeCvFFxT0UM9hs52U1DzqTgL2v3dLRaHgaYZvft_HzDB2JeBWCGPuhNEGpLAScilTyI_YZCclIGV2_NsLe8rOiNYAWpnMTNjbIjhfdyvuxxCwGzh-bRrXuaHuO-J1x1ts-7C951O-Cb1HIh6nzZZq4qUjXPK-47jFZIg5HzHogp1UriG8_Knn7P3xYTF7TuavTy-z6TzxyuohURnaTObGQl4qRFyiBSO0r1IondWgjNXGKSWkFb5CaUvlsjRqMgMD1qpzdrPPjWt9jkhD0dbksYnLYz9SIVWeyjQVICJ6fYCu-zHEKyKltbEik2pHwZ7yoScKWBWbULcubAsBxe7FxeGLoyXZW8it8C_0X_4b4m146Q</recordid><startdate>202010</startdate><enddate>202010</enddate><creator>Klichowicz, Anja</creator><creator>Strehlau, Sascha</creator><creator>Baumann, Martin RK</creator><creator>Krems, Josef F</creator><creator>Rosner, Agnes</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9785-9660</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0522-3989</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202010</creationdate><title>Tracing current explanations in memory: A process analysis based on eye-tracking</title><author>Klichowicz, Anja ; Strehlau, Sascha ; Baumann, Martin RK ; Krems, Josef F ; Rosner, Agnes</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-36e86297809b3eeede80714cf50ba84037847a331281cfe28b3a6584726070883</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Memory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Klichowicz, Anja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strehlau, Sascha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baumann, Martin RK</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krems, Josef F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosner, Agnes</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Klichowicz, Anja</au><au>Strehlau, Sascha</au><au>Baumann, Martin RK</au><au>Krems, Josef F</au><au>Rosner, Agnes</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Tracing current explanations in memory: A process analysis based on eye-tracking</atitle><jtitle>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)</jtitle><date>2020-10</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>73</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1703</spage><epage>1717</epage><pages>1703-1717</pages><issn>1747-0218</issn><eissn>1747-0226</eissn><abstract>Sequential abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. Explanations can be multicausal and require the retrieval of previously found ones from memory. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR) allows detailed predictions on what information is stored and retrieved from memory during reasoning. In the research to date, however, these predictions have never been directly tested. In this study, we tested process assumptions such as the construction of a mental representation from TAR using memory indexing, an eye-tracking method that makes it possible to trace the retrieval of explanations currently held in working memory. Gaze analysis revealed that participants encode the presented evidence (i.e., observations) together with possible explanations into memory. When new observations are presented, the previously presented evidence and explanations are retrieved. Observations that are not explained immediately are encoded as abstractly explained. Abstract explanations enter a refinement process in which they become concrete before they enter the situation model. With the memory indexing method, we were able to assess the process of information retrieval in abductive reasoning, which was previously believed to be unobservable. We discuss the results in the light of TAR and other current theories on the diagnostic reasoning process.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1747021820922509</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9785-9660</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0522-3989</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1747-0218
ispartof Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2020-10, Vol.73 (10), p.1703-1717
issn 1747-0218
1747-0226
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_1747021820922509
source SAGE Journals
subjects Memory
title Tracing current explanations in memory: A process analysis based on eye-tracking
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T17%3A50%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tracing%20current%20explanations%20in%20memory:%20A%20process%20analysis%20based%20on%20eye-tracking&rft.jtitle=Quarterly%20journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology%20(2006)&rft.au=Klichowicz,%20Anja&rft.date=2020-10&rft.volume=73&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1703&rft.epage=1717&rft.pages=1703-1717&rft.issn=1747-0218&rft.eissn=1747-0226&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1747021820922509&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2395255101%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2447816231&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1747021820922509&rfr_iscdi=true