ABSTRACT
We return to the question posed in Section 5.3. How shall subjects’ rejections of arguments that are given derivations by the theory be interpreted? Only principled rejections are at issue. Responses of cannot decide are best ascribed to computational overload of some nature. One possible reason for a principled rejection of an argument is that one or more of the operations required for that argument do not exist in the subjects’ logical competence. We now explore the empirical consequences of this hypothesis. For the moment, it is not important whether the reason for the missing operation is the one proposed in Section 5.3. The latter proposal is taken up again at the end of the present section.
