Reasoning research has long been associated with paper and pencil tasks in which peoples’ reasoning skills are judged against established normative conventions (e.g., Logic). In this way researchers have tried to assess the extent to which we can think rationally, and of course how we deviate from normative conventions. The “fruit flies” of this domain have been the Wason selection task (Wason, 1966), and Syllogistic reasoning tasks (Johnson-Laird, 1984). The field has advanced in helping us to understanding the influence of context on the kinds of inferences we tend to make, and we have gained significant insights into the kinds of situations in which our biased thinking is aligned with normative thinking and the situations in which it conflicts with it.