Logical Thinking in Children Ages Six Through Thirteen

Shapiro, Bernard J.; O’Brien, Thomas C.

doi:10.2307/1127227

Cited by 48 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with the results of other studies (e.g. Hawkins et a/., 1984;Shapiro & O'Brien, 1970), children in each age group displayed a high level of correct responses. For the eight syllogisms, the 5-year-olds scored a mean number of 7.2 correct responses, while the 6-year-olds scored a mean of 7.4 correct responses.…”

Section: Anabsis Of Response Correctnesssupporting

confidence: 91%

Evidence for deductive reasoning: Implicit versus explicit recognition of syllogistic structure

English

1993

British J of Dev Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated children's and adults' ability to solve logical and illogical syllogisms, the latter involving unconnected premises. In Expt 1, 58 5‐ and 6‐year‐olds were individually presented with logical syllogisms set within a fantasy context involving toy play and child play, the latter in the absence of toys. Results showed that a high percentage of children were able to reason solely on the basis of the information given, making reference to the appropriate premise information in drawing their conclusions. Experiments 2 and 3 investigated Markovits, Schleifer & Fortier's (1989) claim that this ability is not sufficient evidence for deductive reasoning. Experiment 2 (168 primary school children) addressed both logical and illogical syllogisms, while Expt 3 (85 secondary students and 81 university students) examined illogical syllogisms only. The results of Expt 2 showed that children responded differently to the two syllogistic forms, with their responses to the illogical syllogisms indicating an implicit awareness of the unconnectedness of the premises. It is argued that this implicit understanding is sufficient evidence for deductive reasoning with illogical syllogisms and that an explicit recognition of indeterminacy, the criterion demanded by Markovits et al., is a more sophisticated application of this reasoning. While the students in Expt 3 demonstrated a more explicit awareness, they nevertheless gave a large number of responses of the implicit type indicating the presence of some non‐age‐related differences in adults' ability explicitly to recognize situations of undecidability.

show abstract

Section: Anabsis Of Response Correctnesssupporting

confidence: 91%

Evidence for deductive reasoning: Implicit versus explicit recognition of syllogistic structure

English

1993

British J of Dev Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most striking result of empirical study of the differences between principles is the repeatedly found disparity between the validity and invalidity principles, the invalidity principles being much more difficult (Carroll 1970;Ceraso & Provitera 1971;Donaldson 1963;Ennis 1971;Ennis & Paulus 1965;Gardiner 1965;Howell 1965;Martens 1967;Miller 1968;O'Brien & Shapiro 1968;Paulus 1967;Roberge 1970b;Ryoti 1972;Sanner 1974;Shapiro & O'Brien 1970;Taplin et al 1974). …”

Section: A Broad View Of Empirical Results Utilizing the Proposed Conmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Alternative to Piaget's Conceptualization of Logical Competence

Ennis¹

1976

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the 1970s, the assessment of the development of students' deductive reasoning abilities during early School Science and Mathematics Volume 83 (1) January 1983 adolescence was the focal point of many published empirical investigations (Kuhn, 1977;Roberge, 1970; Mason, 1978-a, 1977-b; Shapiro and O'Brien, 1970;Taplin, Staudenmayer, and Taddonio, 1974). The results of these studies showed students in grades 5 to 8 had considerable success when they reasoned with valid principles of deductive reasoning, but they demonstrated only minimal understanding of invalid principles (i.e., fallacies).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%