Abstract
Errors in formal syllogistic reasoning have been attributed to nonlogical atmosphere effects or to errors in logical reasoning called illogical conversion and probabilistic inference. These 2 explanations differ in the error tendencies they predict to such a small degree that data concerning error tendencies cannot be used to test their validity. New data were gathered from 33 undergraduates to settle the remaining empirical differences existing between previous studies. The present data were congruent with predictions derived from a unified restatement of the atmosphere interpretation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved)