Utilities in the 2-4-6 Task

Abstract

The Wason 2-4-6 task was embedded in a practical reasoning scenario where number sequences had well-defined utilities in the process of achieving a goal. Reasoners' hypothesis-testing behavior was clearly goal-driven and was significantly influenced by whether the utilities favored positive or negative sequences. In the version of the scenario where generating positive sequences had greater benefits than generating negative ones, participants performed poorly at the task as measured by their ability to guess the correct rule and by the nature and number of triples tested before making an announcement. In contrast, the scenario that assigned a greater utility to the production of negative sequences fostered significantly more diligent and creative hypothesis-testing behavior, and participants were significantly more likely to discover the rule. These results suggest that the poor performance observed in Wason's traditional 2-4-6 task reflects a hypothesis-testing process that by default assigns greater utility to the production of sequences that conform to the initial triple, and hence receive positive feedback. However, reasoners are not averse to producing negative sequences, and understand their implication, if their utility is made relevant in the process of achieving goals.

Insight with hands and things

“…This commitment deflects attention away from the context of reasoning, and reinforces the focus on the capacities that an individual brings to a reasoning task. Yet, thinking and reasoning do not take place in a vacuum, and there is much evidence that systematic manipulations of task instructions, external representations, and artefacts can substantially transform deductive reasoning (e.g., Manktelow & Over, 1991), hypothesis-testing behavior (e.g., Gale & Ball, 2006;Vallée-Tourangeau & Payton, 2008;Vallée-Tourangeau, 2012), transformation problem solving (Zhang & Norman, 1994;Guthrie, Vallée-Tourangeau, Vallée-Tourangeau, & Howard, 2015), mental arithmetic (Carlson, Avraamides, Cary, & Strasberg, 2007;Lave, 1988;Vallée-Tourangeau, 2013), Bayesian reasoning (Vallée-Tourangeau, Abadie, & Vallée-Tourangeau, 2015) and insight problem solving (Weller, Villejoubert, & Vallée-Tourangeau, 2011). These context and representational effects encourage a transactional perspective on cognition.…”

Cognitive events in a problem-solving task: a qualitative method for investigating interactivity in the 17 Animals problem

“…This interplay between action and perception in the dynamics between cognitive agents and their environment have in recent years been studied under the rubric of interactivity (Cowley & Nash, 2013;Cowley & Vallée-Tourangeau, 2013;Guthrie, Vallée-Tourangeau, Vallée-Tourangeau, & Howard, 2015;Kirsh, 2015;Steffensen, 2013;Vallée-Tourangeau, 2012Vallée-Tourangeau, Euden, & Hearn, 2011;F. Vallee-Tourangeau & Payton, 2008;G.…”

Reasoning, Biases and Dual Processes: The Lasting Impact of Wason (1960)

“…The review of work on the 2-4-6 problem has been of necessity both brief and selective, as my remit was to assess the overall impact of theWason (1960) paper, which goes well beyond the invention of this task. Of the studies omitted, I point the reader interested in pragmatic influences on reasoning towards the interesting contributions of Van derHenst (2006) andVallée-Tourangeau (2012).…”