Discussion De-focusing on the Wason Selection Task: Mental Models or Mental Inference Rules? A Commentary on Green and Larking (1995)

1998 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-94
Author(s):  
David K. Hardman
1992 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Politzer ◽  
Anh Nguyen-Xuan

It is proposed that reasoning about social contracts, such as conditional promises and warnings, is under the control of a compound schema made of two pragmatic schemas (Cheng & Holyoak, 1985), expressing an obligation and a permission. Two experiments were run using thematic versions of the Wason selection task in which the rule and the core of the scenario were kept constant and the point of view of the actor (e.g. promisor or promisee) was varied. The results supported the predictions (including the occurrence of a correct pattern of response that consists of all four cards) and falsified predictions derived from Cosmides' (1989) theory of social exchange. The mental models theory and Evans' two-stage theory of reasoning are also discussed in the light of the present results.


PSYCHOLOGIA ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 226-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai HIRAISHI ◽  
Juko ANDO ◽  
Yutaka ONO ◽  
Toshikazu HASEGAWA

Psihologija ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarina Jovanovic ◽  
Iris Zezelj

Man?s deep-rooted tendency to maintain and reinforce a positive self-image makes man inclined to uncritically accept desirable information (the confirmation bias) as well as to criticize and reject undesirable information (the disconfirmation bias). Since disconfirmation strategy leads to a logically correct solution to the four-card Wason selection task, we predicted that ego-involvement manipulation would have a significant effect on the success rate of the task. Specifically, we hypothesized that subjects who were exposed to personally threatening information would try to reject it and thus be more successful on Wason task than those who were exposed to non-threatening information, as established in previously published study by Dawson et al. (2002a). Furthermore, we wanted to examine if manipulating valence framing of the Wason task rule would result in a higher success rate for the group exposed to the threatening and negatively framed rule (that implied their own early death) than the group exposed to the threatening but positively framed rule (that category of people other than the one they belong to live longer). One hundred ninety five high school students from Kragujevac, Serbia participated in the experiment. The results confirmed the expected effect of involvement, while the main effect of framing did not occur. However, there was a marginally significant involvement by framing interaction: unexpectedly, non involved participants were more likely to solve the task correctly when it was positively framed than when in was negatively framed, whilst in the involved group there was no difference in correct responding depending on framing. The findings suggest that the success rate in Wason task can be sensitive to the valence framing of the rule, but only when respondents are not highly personally threatened. Potential methodological interventions in ego-involvement manipulation and content of the rules are discussed.


1996 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1086-1114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans ◽  
Charles E. Ellis ◽  
Stephen E. Newstead

Four experiments are reported which attempt to externalize subjects’ mental representation of conditional sentences, using novel research methods. In Experiment 1, subjects were shown arrays of coloured shapes and asked to rate the degree to which they appeared to be true of conditional statements such as “If the figure is green then it is a triangle”. The arrays contained different distributions of the four logically possible cases in which the antecedent or consequent is true or false: TT, TF, FT, and FF. For example, a blue triangle would be FT for the conditional quoted above. In Experiments 2 to 4, subjects were able to construct their own arrays to make conditionals either true or false with any distribution of the four cases they wished to choose. The presence and absence of negative components was varied, as was the form of the conditional, being either “if then” as above or “only if”: “The figure is green only if it is a triangle”. The first finding was that subjects represent conditionals in fuzzy way: conditionals that include some counter-example TF cases (Experiment 1) may be rated as true, and such cases are often included when subjects construct an array to make the rule true (Experiments 2 to 4). Other findings included a strong tendency to include psychologically irrelevant FT and FF cases in constructed arrays, presumably to show that conditional statements only apply some of the time. A tendency to construct cases in line with the “matching bias” reported on analogous tasks in the literature was found, but only in Experiment 4, where the number of symbols available to construct each case was controlled. The findings are discussed in relation to the major contemporary theories of conditional reasoning based upon inference rules and mental models, neither of which can account for all the results.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document