Investigation of different forms of counterfactual reasoning in adults

Abstract

Counterfactual reasoning is the ability to mentally simulate alternative outcomes to past events. Although previous studies have examined specific aspects of counterfactual reasoning, such as outcome direction (upward versus downward) and antecedent structure (additive versus subtractive), little is known about how these different forms are processed within a unified framework. Moreover, although cognitive mechanisms such as working memory and inhibitory control have been previously considered, their role in processing different counterfactual forms remain unclear. The present study consisted of two experiments with adult Turkish speakers. Experiment 1 ( N  = 44, M _age  = 22.21 years) employed a 2 × 2 within-subject design manipulating counterfactual direction (upward versus downward) and antecedent structure (additive versus subtractive). Experiment 2 ( N  = 40, M _age  = 22.17 years) employed a 2 × 2 within-subject design manipulating counterfactual direction and grammatical polarity (consequent-subtractive versus consequent-additive). Individual differences in inhibitory control, working memory and relative clause comprehension were also assessed. The results indicated that upward and consequent-subtractive counterfactuals were processed more quickly than downward and consequent-additive ones. Unexpectedly, additive statements produced quicker responses compared to subtractive ones. Inhibitory control was a strong predictor of performance, whereas working memory had a minimal effect. These results suggest that the processing of counterfactual expressions is influenced by both linguistic and semantic structures.