Experts and laymen grossly underestimate the benefits of argumentation for reasoning

Thinking and Reasoning 21 (3):341-355 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Many fields of study have shown that group discussion generally improves reasoning performance for a wide range of tasks. This article shows that most of the population, including specialists, does not expect group discussion to be as beneficial as it is. Six studies asked participants to solve a standard reasoning problem—the Wason selection task—and to estimate the performance of individuals working alone and in groups. We tested samples of U.S., Indian, and Japanese participants, European managers, and psychologists of reasoning. Every sample underestimated the improvement yielded by group discussion. They did so even after they had been explained the correct answer, or after they had had to solve the problem in groups. These mistaken intuitions could prevent individuals from making the best of institutions that rely on group discussion, from collaborative learning and work teams to deliberative assemblies

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-11-25

Downloads
68 (#236,921)

6 months
5 (#882,313)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Christophe Heintz
Central European University
Hugo Mercier
Institut Jean Nicod

References found in this work

The law of group polarization.Cass R. Sunstein - 2002 - Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2):175–195.
The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind.Gustave Le Bon - 1899 - International Journal of Ethics 9 (4):521-523.
On the Universality of Argumentative Reasoning.Hugo Mercier - 2011 - Journal of Cognition and Culture 11 (1-2):85-113.

View all 7 references / Add more references