The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Everyday Reasoning and the Roots of Intelligence
Abstract
Be reasonable! That familiar imperative serves as just one reminder of the value we vest in people&s;s rational conduct of their own lives and their dealings with others. We want ourselves and those with whom we interact to make sound decisions that reflect thoughtful exploration of the alternatives and the factors that recommend one over another. We want to eschew silly, hasty, and misguided beliefs in favor of a sound picture of the world. Although we may, on occasion, want to take a little fling and do something unreasonable, on the whole we all want to be reasonable.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.
Haidt, J. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.4.814 · Cited by 8,048
Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises
Nickerson, R. S. (1998) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 · Cited by 7,267
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory
Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x10000968 · Cited by 2,254
Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research
Sadler, T. D. (2004) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20009 · Cited by 1,440
Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.10008 · Cited by 1,346
Metadata
- Venue
- Informal Reasoning and Education
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2012-11-12
- Pages
- 101-124
- OpenAlex
- W1633931040
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.68
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Everyday Reasoning and the Roots of Intelligence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9780203052228-9
- The paper
- Everyday Reasoning and the Roots of Intelligence. (2012). Informal Reasoning and Education. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203052228-9
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
