Reasoning About Consistency with Spatial Mental Models: Hidden and Obvious Indeterminacy in Spatial Descriptions

The assessment of whether a statement is consistent with what has gone before is ubiquitous in discourse comprehension. One theory of the process is that individuals search for a mental model of a situation in which all the statements in the discourse are true. In the case of spatial descriptions, individuals should prefer to construct models, which retain the information in the description. Hence, they should use strategies that retain information in an efficient way. If the descriptions are consistent with multiple models then they are likely to run into difficulties. We report some preliminary results of experiments in which the participants judged the consistency of spatial descriptions. The participants made more errors when later assertions in the description conflicted with the preferred models of earlier assertions.

[1]  Markus Knauff,et al.  The cognitive adequacy of Allen's interval calculus for qualitative spatial representation and reasoning , 1999, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[2]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Two principles of premise integration in spatial reasoning , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[3]  G. d'Ydewalle,et al.  Deductive Reasoning and Strategies , 1999 .

[4]  Stephen J. Payne,et al.  Memory for mental models of spatial descriptions: An episodic-construction-trace hypothesis , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[5]  M. Knauff,et al.  Preferred mental models in qualitative spatial reasoning: A cognitive assessment of Allen's calculus , 1995 .

[6]  C. Linde,et al.  Spatial Networks as a Site for the Study of Language and Thought. , 1975 .

[7]  P. Johnson-Laird.  Mental models , 1989 .

[8]  S. Phillips,et al.  Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. , 1998, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[9]  Graeme S. Halford,et al.  Cognitive complexity of suppositional reasoning: An application of the relational complexity metric to the knight-knave task , 2002 .

[10]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Descriptions of Simple Spatial Scenes in English and Japanese , 2003, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[11]  B. Tversky,et al.  Spatial mental models derived from survey and route descriptions , 1992 .

[12]  S. Levinson.  Frames of reference and Molyneux's question: Cross-linguistic evidence , 1996 .

[13]  P. Johnson-Laird,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article MODELS OF CONSISTENCY , 2022 .

[14]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Whither structured representation? , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[15]  André Vandierendonck,et al.  Mental model construction in linear reasoning: Evidence for the construction of initial annotated models , 2004, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[16]  S. Levinson,et al.  LANGUAGE AND SPACE , 1996 .

[17]  Daniel C. Richardson,et al.  Eye Movements During Comprehension of Spoken Scene Descriptions , 2000 .

[18]  P N Johnson-Laird,et al.  Illusions in reasoning about consistency. , 2000, Science.

[19]  Janellen Huttenlocher,et al.  Constructing spatial images: A strategy in reasoning. , 1968 .

[20]  B. Tversky,et al.  Cross-cultural and developmental trends in graphic productions , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  B. Tversky,et al.  Perspective in Spatial Descriptions , 1996 .