Mental Models vs Integrated Models: Explanations of Syllogistic Reasoning

1996 ◽  
Vol 82 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1377-1378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maurizio Cardaci ◽  
Amelia Gangemi ◽  
Giuseppa Pendolino ◽  
Santo Di Nuovo
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Syllogistic Reasoning ◽  
Integrated Models ◽  
Multiple Choice Questionnaire

To compare mental versus integrated models explanations of syllogistic reasoning, we administered a multiple-choice questionnaire containing 19 pairs of syllogistic premises with valid conclusions (given in a C-A order) to 72 psychology undergraduates. Association between our integrated models classification and the empirical difficulty of items was strong.

Figural Effects in a Syllogistic Evaluation Paradigm

2007 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 120-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward J.N. Stupple ◽  
Linden J. Ball
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Syllogistic Reasoning ◽  
Inspection Time ◽  
Natural Mode ◽  
Integrated Models ◽  
Processing Effort ◽  
The Impact ◽  
First In First Out

Abstract. Robust biases have been found in syllogistic reasoning that relate to the figure of premises and to the directionality of terms in given conclusions. Mental models theorists (e.g., Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 1991 ) have explained figural bias by assuming that reasoners can more readily form integrated models of premises when their middle terms are contiguous than when they are not. Biases associated with the direction of conclusion terms have been interpreted as reflecting a natural mode of reading off conclusions from models according to a “first-in, first-out principle.” We report an experiment investigating the impact of systematic figural and conclusion-direction manipulations on the processing effort directed at syllogistic components, as indexed through a novel inspection-time method. The study yielded reliable support for mental-models predictions concerning the nature and locus of figural and directionality effects in syllogistic reasoning. We argue that other accounts of syllogistic reasoning seem less able to accommodate the full breadth of inspection-time findings observed.

Problem Difficulty and Response Format in Syllogistic Reasoning

1995 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 945-975 ◽  
Author(s):  
David K. Hardman ◽  
Stephen J. Payne
Keyword(s):  
Mental Models ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Syllogistic Reasoning ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Response Format ◽  
Problem Difficulty ◽  
Multiple Model ◽  
Evaluation Task ◽  
Initial Hypothesis ◽  
The Subject

It was hypothesized that the perceived irrelevance of the proposition “Some X are not Y” is a factor contributing to the difficulty of nearly all the determinate syllogisms classed as multiple model by Johnson-Laird and Byrne (1991), according to mental models theory. Experiment 1 supported this hypothesis by showing that subjects frequently correctly evaluate valid “Some … not” conclusions but rarely produce them, even when they have evaluated them elsewhere. Explanations of these findings based on the use of superficial strategies were ruled out. Experiment 2 further supported the hypothesis by showing that performance increased across the no-conclusion, multiple-choice, and evaluation task formats, and that this effect generalized to problems containing the quantifier “only”. However, the initial hypothesis was rejected in light of Experiment 3, which found no difference between multiple-choice and no-conclusion formats when the number of allowable conclusions was controlled for. Nevertheless, superior performance remained in the evaluation format, and it is suggested that offered conclusions may be used as a goal for the reasoning process. This interpretation is supported by the finding (Experiments 1 and 3) that subjects appear to search only for alternative conclusions that maintain the subject-predicate structure of the offered conclusion.

scholarly journals Use of a multiple choice questionnaire to assess UK prescribing channels’ knowledge of helminthology and best practice surrounding anthelmintic use in livestock and horses

2016 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 70-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Easton ◽  
David J. Bartley ◽  
Emily Hotchkiss ◽  
Jane E. Hodgkinson ◽  
Gina L. Pinchbeck ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Multiple Choice Questionnaire

Speech Differences along the Ontario United States Border

1956 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter S. Avis ◽  
R. M. C. Kingston
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Multiple Choice ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Field Worker ◽  
Satisfactory Method ◽  
Multiple Choice Questionnaire

The most satisfactory method of collecting data concerning speech habits demands that a trained fieldworker conduct personal interviews with representative informants. Since, however, the time and money required for carrying out such interviews are seldom available, the investigator must often turn to less satisfactory but more practicable methods; one of these is the multiple-choice questionnaire of the type used to gather the information for this limited survey of Ontario speech habits. The fundamental weakness of the circulated questionnaire is self-evident: the informant must substitute for the trained field worker and observe his own usage. His success in making reliable observations will depend on his native intelligence and level of education, his understanding of the significance of the survey, and his conscientiousness with regard to answering the questions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document