The Comparative Effects of Didactic-Correction and Self-Contradiction on Fallacious Scientific and Personal Reasoning

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The relative power of two methods of changing fallacious reasoning was investigated in 160 male and female undergraduate university students. Ss were randomized among three experimental conditions: didactic-correction method, self-contradiction method, control. Resistance to committing the fallacies of affirmation of the consequent and denial of the antecedent was studied in an experimental reasoning task. The didactic-correction method was significantly (p < .001) more effective than the self-contradiction method for both types of logical fallacies and for both scientific reasoning problems and personal reasoning problems. On a transfer task concerned with a reduction of errors in drawing logical inferences, the didactic-correction method was significantly (p < .01) more effective than the self-contradiction method. It was concluded that the didactic-correction method, based on repetitive cognitive information feedback procedures, was more effective in reducing fallacious reasoning than the self-contradiction method, based on self-recognition of inconsistency in inferential behavior. It was recommended that the comparative efficacy of the didactic-correction and self-contradiction methods be studied in a fixed array rather than in a trial by trial paradigm in order to reduce memory load and that generality of method effectiveness be studied with types of logical fallacies beyond the affirmation of the consequent and the denial of the antecedent.