ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2022
Language as a mechanism for reasoning about possibilities.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Children's Representations of Possibility: Uncertainty About "What" Is Easier Than Uncertainty About "Where".Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2026Article
- The road to negation: A comparative study of five typologically and culturally diverse languages.First language · 2025Article
- Thinking about possibilities: mechanisms, ontogeny, functions and phylogeny.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ability to entertain and reflect on possibilities is a crucial component of human reasoning. However, the origin of this reasoning-whether it is language-based or not-is highly debated. We contribute to this debate by investigating the relation between language and thought in the domain of possibility from a developmental perspective. Our investigation focuses on disjunctive syllogism, a specific type of possibility reasoning that has been explored extensively in the developmental literature and has clear linguistic correlates. Seeking links between conceptual and linguistic representations, we review evidence on how children reason by the disjunctive syllogism and how they acquire logical and modal language. We sketch a proposal for how language and thought interact during development. This article is part of the theme issue 'Thinking about possibilities: mechanisms, ontogeny, functions and phylogeny'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.