Cited by 322Logic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsCategorization, perception, and language

Approaches to studying formal and everyday reasoning.

Galotti, Kathleen M.·1989·Psychological Bulletin

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.331

Cites

108 of 108 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Galotti, K. M.
Affiliations
Carleton College (US)
Corresponding author
Galotti, Kathleen M.
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
1989-05
Volume
105
Issue
3
Pages
331-351
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W1986884366
Cited by
322
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
6.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
formal reasoning, everyday reasoning, reasoning, problem solving, cognitive psychology of reasoning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review