Exploring the determinants of dual goal facilitation in a rule discovery task

Thinking and Reasoning

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 294-315

  Gale, Maggie ^a   Ball, Linden J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DERBY   (United Kingdom)

^b LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

2 4 6 task; Contrast class account; Dual goal facilitation; Hypothesis testing; Rule discovery

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449629253     PISSN: 13546783     EISSN: 14640708     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13546780903040666     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Caverni, J-P., & Rossi, S. (1997). A nice bit of scandal: About a disconfirmation bias in the Wason's 2-4-6 problem. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 56, 239-242.
2. Cherubini, P., Castelvecchio, E., & Cherubini, A. M. (2005). Generation of hypotheses in Wason's 2-4-6-task: An information theory approach. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 309-332.
3. Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365-395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Evans, J. St. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
5. Evans, J. S. B. T. (2006). The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 378-395.
6. Evans, J. St. B. T. (2007). Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgement. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
7. Farris, H., & Revlin, R. (1989a). Sensible reasoning in two tasks: Rule discovery and hypothesis evaluation. Memory & Cognition, 17, 221-232.
8. Farris, H., & Revlin, R. (1989b). The discovery process: A counterfactual strategy. Social Studies of Science, 19, 497-513.
9. Gale, M., & Ball, L. J. (2005). Contrast-class cues and dual goal facilitation in Wason's 2-4-6 task: Evidence for an extended iterative counterfactual model. In B. G. Bara, L. Barsalou, & M. Bucciarelli (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp. 738-743). Alpha, NJ: Sheridan Printing.
10. 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.
11. Gorman, M. E. (1992). Experimental simulations of falsification. In M. T. Keane & K. J. Gilhooly (Eds.), Advances in the psychology of thinking (Vol. 1). Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
12. Gorman, M. E. (1995). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and invention: The case of Alexander Graham Bell and the telephone. Thinking & Reasoning, 1, 31-53.
13. Gorman, M. E., Stafford, A., & Gorman, M. E. (1987). Disconfirmation and dual hypotheses on a more difficult version of Wason's 2-4-6 task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 1-28.
14. Kareev, Y., Halberstadt, N., & Shafir, D. (1993). Improving performance and increasing the use of non-positive testing in a rule-discovery task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 729-742.
15. Klahr, D. (2000). Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1-48.
17. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y-W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
18. Klayman, J., & Ha, Y-W. (1989). Hypothesis testing in rule discovery: Strategy, structure and content. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 15, 596-604.
19. Morley, N. J., Ball, L. J., & Ormerod, T. C. (2006). How the detection of insurance fraud succeeds and fails. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 12, 163-180.
20. Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E., & Tweney, R. D. (1978). Consequences of confirmation and disconfirmation in a simulated research environment. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 611-627.
21. Oaksford, M. (2002). Contrast classes and matching bias as explanations of the effects of negation on conditional reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 8, 135-151.
22. Oaksford, M., & Chater, N. (1994). Another look at eliminative and enumerative behaviour in a conceptual task. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 6, 149-169.
23. Okada, T., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21, 109-146.
24. Ormerod, T. C., Barrett, E., & Taylor, P. J. (2008). Sensemaking in criminal investigations. In J. M. Schraagen, L. Militello, T. C. Ormerod, & R. Lipshitz (Eds.), Naturalistic decision making and macrocognition (pp. 81-102). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
25. Poletiek, F. H. (1996). Paradoxes of falsification. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 447-462.
26. Poletiek, F. H. (2001). Hypothesis-testing behaviour. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
27. Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
28. Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction: An analysis of the foundations and the structure of knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
29. Rossi, S., Caverni, J-P., & Girotto, V. (2001). Hypothesis testing in a rule discovery problem: When a focused procedure is effective. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 263-267.
30. Siegel, S., & Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. New York: McGraw Hill.
31. Tukey, D. D. (1986). A philosophical and empirical analysis of subjects' modes of inquiry in Wason's 2-4-6 task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38A, 5-33.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. 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.
35. Vallée-Tourangeau, F., & Payton, T. (2008). Graphical representation fosters discovery in the 2-4-6 task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 625-640.
36. 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. Schunn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 902-907). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
37. Wason, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129-140.
38. Wason, P. C. (1966). Reasoning. In B.M. Foss (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (pp. 135-151). Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
39. Wetherick, N. E. (1962). Eliminative and enumerative behaviour in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 129-140.
40. 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.