Is model construction open to strategic decisions? An exploration in the field of linear reasoning

Abstract

This paper reports four experiments investigating whether model construction of linear reasoning problems is open to strategic decisions. A reversed choice/nochoice paradigm was used in which reasoners first had to apply two model construction strategies (acronym and rehearsal strategy) to two problem sets. Next, they could choose freely among the two strategies to apply to a new problem set. Experiment 1 showed that reasoners selected the strategy that they experienced as the most accurate one in the no-choice phase. Moreover, in Experiment 2, it was found that reasoners adapted their strategy choice to changing problem features, to use the most suitable strategy for premise encoding. Experiments 3 and 4 generalised these findings to more complex linear reasoning problems with a mixed sentence frame and a semi-continuous presentation of the premises, and to two-model problems. On the basis of these results, we argue that strategic decisions influence model construction in linear reasoning.For a long time, research in deductive reasoning has been driven by intense debates on the nature of the reasoning mechanism underlying all types of deductive reasoning. The heart of this controversy concerned the question of whether reasoning involves the syntactic application of natural deduction rules (mental rule theories; e.g., Rips, 1994) or is based upon the construction and manipulation of mental models representing the

Explaining inappropriate strategy selection in a simple reasoning task

“…Such a deficit has been suggested by past research (e.g. Dierckx & Vandierendonck, 2005; Dierckx et al , 2003; Schunn & Reder, 2001), where it has been associated with lower working memory capacity. Hence, Dierckx and Vandierendonck suggest that strategy selection procedures are not cost‐free to implement, and therefore high task demands may discourage their execution for certain people.…”

“…Lemaire & Siegler, 1995) and individual differences (e.g. Dierckx, Vandierendonck, & Pandelaere, 2003; Schunn & Reder, 2001) in strategy adaptivity, so that some people are better able to identify more appropriate methods than others.…”

Reasoning about relations.

“…We have yet to formulate an algorithm that can develop strategies from elementary tactical steps in reasoning about relations (cf. Dierckx, Vandierendonck, & Pandelaere, 2003). For this problem, the theory is far from comprehensive.…”

A psicologia cognitiva e o estudo do raciocínio dedutivo no último meio século

“…Neste âmbito diversas investigações dão suporte à teoria dos modelos mentais, quer no domínio do raciocínio temporal (e.g., Dierckx, Vandierendonck, & Pandelaere, 2003;Quelhas, Johnson-Laird, & Juhos, 2010, Exp. 4;Schaeken & Johnson-Laird, 2000;Schaeken, Johnson-Laird, & d'Ydewalle, 1996a,b;Vandierendonck & De Vooght, 1996), quer no domínio do raciocínio espacial (e.g., Byrne & Johnson-Laird, 1989;Carreiras & Santamaria, 1997;Duyck, Vandierendonck, & De Vooght, 2003;Van der Henst, 1999;Vandierendonck & De Vooght, 1996).…”