Graphical representation fosters discovery in the 2-4-6 task

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 625-640

  Vallée Tourangeau, Frédéric ^a   Payton, Teresa ^a  

^a KINGSTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MATHEMATICS; VISION;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MATHEMATICS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 40049096830     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210701268039     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Baron, J. (2000). Thinking and deciding (3rd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
2. Cheng, P. C.-H. (1992). Diagrammatic reasoning in scientific discovery: Modelling Galileo's kinematic diagrams. In H. Narayanan (Ed.), Working notes of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Reasoning with Diagrammatic Representations (pp. 33-38). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
3. Cheng, P. C-H., & Simon, H. A. (1992). The right representation for discovery: Finding the conservation of momentum. In D. Sleeman & P. Edwards (Eds.), Machine learning: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference (pp. 62-71). San Mateo, CA: Kaufmann.
4. Cheng, P. C-H., & Simon, H. A. (1995). Scientific discovery and creative reasoning with diagrams. In S. Smith, T. Ward, & R. Finke (Eds.), The creative cognition approach (pp. 205-228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Cherubini, P., Castelvecchio, E., & Cherubini, A. M. (2005). Generation of hypotheses in Wason's 24-6 task: An information theory approach. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 309-332.
6. Duhem, P. (1962). The aim and structure of physical theory. New York: Holiday House.
7. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
8. Gale, M., & Ball, L. J. (2006). Dual-goal facilitation in Wason's 2-4-6 task: What mediates successful rule discovery? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 873-885.
9. Gorman, M. E., & Gorman, M. E. (1984). A comparison of disconfirmatory, confirmatory and control strategies on Wason's 2-4-6 task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 629-648.
10. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y.-W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
11. Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 255-275.
12. Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
13. Ohlsson, S. (1984). Restructuring revisited II: An information processing theory of restructuring and insight. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 25, 117-129.
14. Poletiek, F. H. (2001). Hypothesis testing behaviour. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
15. Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 185-213.
16. Schooler, J. W., Ohlsson, S., & Brooks, K. (1993). Thoughts beyond words: When language overshadows insight. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 166-183.
17. Schustack, M. W. (1988). Thinking about causality. In R. J. Sternberg & E. E. Smith (Eds.), The psychology of human thought (pp. 92-115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Stenning, K., & Oberlander, J. (1995). A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: logic and implementation. Cognitive Science, 19, 97-140.
20. Sutherland, S. (1992). Irrationality, the enemy within. London: Penguin.
21. Tweney, R. D., Doherty, M. E., Worner, W. J., Pliske, D. B., Mynatt, C. R., Gross, K. A., et al. (1980). Strategies of rule discovery in an inference task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 109-123.
22. Vallée-Tourangeau, F., Austin, N. G., & Rankin, S. (1995). Inducing a rule in Wason's 2-4-6 task: A test of the information-quantity and goal-complementarity hypotheses. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 895-914.
23. Vallée-Tourangeau, F., & Krüsi Penney, A. (2005). The impact of external representation in a rule discovery task. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 820-834.
24. Van der Henst, J.-B., Rossi, S., Schroyens, W. (2002). When participants are not misled they are not so bad after all: A pragmatic analysis of a rule discovery task. In W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 902-908).
25. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Wason, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129-140.
26. Watson, J. D. (1968). The double helix. London: Penguin.
27. Wharton, C. M., Cheng, P. W., & Wickens, T. D. (1993). Hypothesis testing strategies: Why two goals are better than one. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 743-758.
28. Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21, 179-217.
29. Zhang, J., & Norman, D. A. (1994). Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science, 18, 87-122.