Rethinking relevance: Repetition priming reveals the psychological reality of adaptive specializations for reasoning

Theories advanced to explain conditional reasoning range from those that invoke inference systems that evolved for specific domains (such as social exchange, precautions, or deontic regulations) to relevance theory, a relatively domain-general account that invokes conversational pragmatics. The present research utilized a novel extension of repetition priming, in conjunction with the Wason selection task (a widely known and used task to test people's conditional reasoning), to evaluate alternative theories of human reasoning. Across five experiments, testing over 600 participants, consistent priming across selection tasks was demonstrated. The pattern of priming effects supports models of human reasoning based on specific evolved reasoning abilities, and was inconsistent with general conditional reasoning models such as relevance theory. These results also converge with neurological and clinical evidence of divided psychological processes for reasoning about relatively specific domains, based on functionally distinct inference systems.