REALISM AND LINGUISTIC COMPLEXITY IN REASONING

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
An experiment was performed to determine whether there would be a difference in insight between an inferential problem expressed in a symbolic and in a realistic form. The task consisted of the selection of cards which, if turned over, could violate a given rule. The logical relation which the rule expressed was that of material implication, presented in four different linguistic forms. In addition, the rule expressed either an arbitrary relation between symbols, or a realistic relation between supposed states of affairs. There was a large difference between the symbolic condition and realistic condition: only 7 out of 24 subjects made the correct response in the symbolic condition, whereas 18 of them did so in the realistic condition. There was an interaction between the linguistic form of the rule and the mode of presentation of the problem, and a different error pattern for different linguistic forms. It is argued that the crucial underlying variables in the realistic condition may be revealed by manipulating those variables in concrete material which affect insight.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: