What are the main contributing factors to road accidents? Factors such as inexperience, lack of skill, and risk-taking behaviors have been associated with the collisions of young drivers. In contrast, visual, cognitive, and mobility impairment have been associated with the collisions of older drivers. We investigated the main causes of road accidents by drawing on multiple sources: expert views of police officers, lay views of the driving public, and official road accident records. In Studies 1 and 2, police officers and the public were asked about the typical causes of road traffic collisions using hypothetical accident scenarios. In Study 3, we investigated whether the views of police officers and the public about accident causation influence their recall accuracy for factors reported to contribute to hypothetical road accidents. The results show that both expert views of police officers and lay views of the driving public closely approximated the typical factors associated with the collisions of young and older drivers, as determined from official accident records. The results also reveal potential underreporting of factors in existing accident records, identifying possible inadequacies in law enforcement practices for investigating driver distraction, drug and alcohol impairment, and uncorrected or defective eyesight. Our investigation also highlights a need for accident report forms to be continuously reviewed and updated to ensure that contributing factor lists reflect the full range of factors that contribute to road accidents. Finally, the views held by police officers and the public on accident causation influenced their memory recall of factors involved in hypothetical scenarios. These findings indicate that delay in completing accident report forms should be minimised, possibly by use of mobile reporting devices at the accident scene.

The statement, some elephants have trunks, is logically true but pragmatically infelicitous. Whilst some is logically consistent with all, it is often pragmatically interpreted as precluding all. In Experiments 1 and 2, we show that with pragmatically impoverished materials, sensitivity to the pragmatic implicature associated with some is apparent earlier in development than has previously been found. Amongst 8-year-old children, we observed much greater sensitivity to the implicature in pragmatically enriched contexts. Finally, in Experiment 3, we found that amongst adults, logical responses to infelicitous some statements take longer to produce than do logical responses to felicitous some statements, and that working memory capacity predicts the tendency to give logical responses to the former kind of statement. These results suggest that some adults develop the ability to inhibit a pragmatic response in favour of a logical answer. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of pragmatic inference.

Reasoning that is deliberative and reflective often requires the inhibition of intuitive responses.The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) is designed to assess people's ability to suppress incorrect heuristic responses in favor of deliberation. Correct responding on the CRT predicts performance on a range of tasks in which intuitive processes lead to incorrect responses, suggesting indirectly that CRT performance is related to cognitive control. Yet little is known about the cognitive processes underlying performance on the CRT. In the current research, we employed a novel mouse tracking methodology to capture the time-course of reasoning on the CRT. Analysis of mouse cursor trajectories revealed that participants were initially drawn towards the incorrect (i.e., intuitive) option even when the correct (deliberative) option was ultimately chosen.Conversely, participants were not attracted to the correct option when they ultimately chose the incorrect intuitive one. We conclude that intuitive processes are activated automatically on the CRT and must be inhibited in order to respond correctly. When participants responded intuitively, there was no evidence that deliberative reasoning had become engaged.

No abstract

No abstract