Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.
- Andre Vandierendonck (1996). Evidence for Mental-Model-Based Reasoning: A Comparison of Reasoning with Time and Space Concepts. Thinking and Reasoning 2 (4):249 – 272.Johnson-Laird (1983) has argued that spatial reasoning is based on the construction and manipulation of mental models in memory. The present article addresses the question of whether reasoning about time relations is constrained by the same factors as reasoning about spatial relations. An experiment is reported that explored the similarities and the differences in the performance of subjects in comparable spatial and temporal reasoning tasks. The results indicated that, in both the temporal and the spatial content domains, the data were in agreement with the view that subjects solved problems by constructing models in memory rather than with a logical rule conceptualisation of reasoning. An analysis of the premise-reading times on the basis of premise-linking order provided support for an on-line process of mental models construction, and offered an explanation for the finding that spatial problems that did require an inference of transitivity were easier than problems that did not. No essential differences in processing and performance were observed across the two content domains, although in the time domain the correctness data were in agreement with both the mental models theory and the logical rules view. The results are discussed with respect to the mental models theory and the structural characteristics of the problems.No categoriesReading list | Discuss | Edit | Categorize |My bibliography
| Export citation | Scholar | At my library 
Similar books and articles
According to the mental models theory, reasoning performance is primarily influenced by the number of models of a problem that can be constructed. This study investigates whether the content of the model may also influence performance. Linear reasoning problems were devised that either described a believable (script-consistent) or an unbelievable (script-inconsistent) order of actions. The results of two experiments showed that conclusions were inferred more slowly and less accurately on the basis of an unbelievable model than on a believable one. Experiment 2 revealed that script knowledge facilitated as well as impeded reasoning performance. Conclusion evaluation was faster and more accurately for script-consistent problems than for neutral problems, whereas model construction and conclusion evaluation occurred respectively more slowly and less accurately for script-inconsistent problems than for neutral problems. These results show that the content of the model is a noteworthy factor influencing reasoning performance.
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Scholar | At my library | More options ... The mental model theory predicts variations in the percentage of errors in meta-propositional reasoning tasks but does not specify the nature of these errors (Johnson-Laird & Byrne, 1990). In the present study, we drew predictions concerning the nature of errors in a meta-propositional reasoning task by importing and elaborating the distinction between implicit and explicit models previously applied by the mental model theory to the domain of propositional reasoning (Johnson-Laird, Byrne, & Schaeken, 1992). An experiment was conducted in which participants were asked to solve problems concerning the truth or falsity of propositional assertions. The task was to determine the truth-status (liar or truth-teller) of two persons making a propositional assertion about their own truth-status and/or the truth-status of the other person. The results were consistent with the hypothesis that people may reason in ways that differ in the extent to which initially implicit models are made explicit. As such, the results corroborate a basic principle of the mental model theory: the errors that reasoners make are consistent with at least one of the mental models they construct during the process of reasoning.
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ... Johnson-Laird's mental models theory claims that reasoning is a semantic process of construction and manipulation of models in working memory of limited capacity. Accordingly, both a deduction and a given interpretation of a premise would be all the harder the higher the number of models they require. The purpose of the present experiment was twofold. First, it aimed to demonstrate that the interpretation of if...then conditional sentences in children (third, sixth, and ninth graders) evolves as a function of the number of models the children can produce. We proposed a theory of conditional reasoning development that hypothesises a developmental trend of three successive levels of interpretations underlain by one, two, and then three models, i.e. conjunctive, biconditional, and conditional respectively. Second, we aimed to show that these different levels correlate with working memory capacities: the higher the working memory span, the higher the number of models underlying the conditional interpretation. These two hypotheses were verified, supporting the mental models theory. The results are compared with the rival theory of mental logic.
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Scholar | At my library | More options ... The aim of the present research was to develop a difficulty model for logical reasoning problems involving complex ordered arrays used in the Graduate Record Examination. The approach used involved breaking down the problems into their basic cognitive elements such as the complexity of the rules used, the number of mental models required to represent the problem, and question type. Weightings for these different elements were derived from two experimental studies and from the reasoning literature. Based on these weights, difficulty models were developed which were then tested against new data. The models had excellent predictive validity and showed the relative influence of rule based factors and factors relating to the number of underlying models. Different difficulty models were needed for different question types, suggesting that people used a variety of approaches and, at a wider level, that both mental models and mental rules may be used in reasoning.
No categories
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ... Mental model theory has been used to explain many differing phenomena in adult reasoning, including the extensively studied case of conditional reasoning. However, the current theory makes predictions about the development of conditional reasoning that are not consistent with data. In this article, young children's performance on conditional reasoning problems and the justifications given are analysed. A mental model account of conditional reasoning is proposed that assumes that (1) young children can reason with two models and (2) the fleshing out of conditionals involves activation of information in semantic memory that uses the minor premise as a retrieval cue.
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Scholar | At my library | More options ... This article describes a study on capacity limitations that affect the construction of spatial mental models. A process model is presented, according to which the construction of a mental model in Ehrlich and Johnson-Laird's (1982) spatial descriptions task places a workload of six information chunks for continuous and semi-continuous descriptions, and seven chunks for discontinuous descriptions. Participants (48 undergraduate students) performed the spatial descriptions task and the figural intersections test (FIT), which yields a capacity score. The pattern of errors and sentence reading times in the spatial descriptions task confirmed that participants were using mental models. The FIT score was positively correlated with accuracy in the spatial descriptions task. Prediction analysis of cross-classification tables showed that, for successful performance in continuous and semi-continuous descriptions, a FIT score of 6 was necessary, and a score of 7 in discontinuous descriptions. These results are in agreement with theoretical predictions. The issue of integrating mental models theory with analyses of capacity limitations in performance is discussed.
No categories
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Scholar | At my library | More options ... We examine the role of working memory's central executive in the mental model explanation of propositional reasoning by using two working memory measures: the classical “reading span” test by Daneman and Carpenter (1980) and a new measure. This new “reasoning span” measure requires individuals to solve very simple anaphora problems, and store and remember the word solution in a growing series of inferential problems. We present one experiment in which we check the involvement of the central executive in conditional and disjunctive inference tasks and compare predictions of the new reasoning span test with those of the classical reading span test. The results of the experiment confirm that reasoning responses, which according to mental model theory require high cognitive work, are predicted by working memory measures. Results also show that some reasoning responses are probably obtained by means of superficial biases or strategies that do not load working memory. The reasoning span test, which involves the central executive to a greater degree, predicts reasoning performance better than the reading span test. The significance and possibilities of the new measure in studying reasoning are discussed.
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Scholar | At my library | More options ... In previous research, Toms, Morris, and Ward (1993) have shown that conditional reasoning is impaired by a concurrent task calling on executive functions but not by concurrent tasks that load on the slave systems of the working memory system as conceptualised by Baddeley and Hitch (1974). The present article replicates and extends this previous work by studying problems based on spatial as well as nonspatial relations. In the study 42 participants solved 16 types of spatial or nonspatial problems, both in a single-task condition and under concurrent matrix tapping, a task loading the visuo-spatial sketch pad. The findings were consistent with those of Toms et al. (1993) for problems with a nonspatial content. However, when the content was spatial, and only then, a dual-task impairment was observed: processing time of the first premise was lengthened, especially for problems with negations in the antecedent term, the consequent term, or both; moreover, the number of correctly solved problems with negations in both terms was smaller. The implications of these findings for the mental models theory and the mental logic theory are discussed.
No categories
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ... Two experiments investigated the mental representation of spatial and nonspatial two-dimensional problems. The experiments were designed to contrast opposite predictions of the model theory of reasoning and the formal rules of inference theories. Half of the problems required more inferential steps but only one model, whereas the other half required fewer inferential steps but two models. According to the inference rules, theory problems that require more inferential steps should be harder, whereas the model-based theory predicts that problems that require two models should be harder. In Experiments 1a and 1b we measured the problem solving time and the percentage of errors. In Experiments 2a and 2b the problems were presented segmented in two different displays. We measured the comprehension time for each display, the question answering times, and the percentage of errors. The results of all experiments supported the model theory predictions in both spatial and nonspatial domains.
No categories
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Other links: informaworld.com | Scholar | At my library | More options ... In contrast to Pylyshyn's view, there is no such thing as “reasoning in general.” Different types of reasoning tasks are solved with different reasoning strategies. A more specific null hypothesis is that spatial inference with mental images involves the same representational formalism as that of spatial inference with mental models. There is no evidence that this hypothesis must be rejected.
No categories
Reading list
| Discuss | Edit | Categorize | My bibliography | Export citation | Scholar | At my library | More options ...
| | Scholar | At my library | More options ... Discussion of Andre Vandierendonck, Evidence for mental-model-based reasoning: A comparison of reasoning with time and space concepts
 Back
All discussions
Start a new thread
|
There are no threads in this forum |
Nothing in this forum yet.
