ASSIGNMENT REPORT FORM

Student ID Tutor ID Date Student sent

assignment:06/12

58117156 Name: /2010

Date Received by

tutor:
Date Sent to

Oscail:
Overall Mark Obtained:

Module:PSY 4 Group: 1 TMA No:

Summary of Performance*

Bands

1
Performa E V G F W P
nce x e o a e o N
Compone c r o i a o o
nts e y d r k r t
l
l G ( ( a
e o H H M p
n o 2 3 M a p
t d . ) a r l
2 r k i
( ( ) k s c
H H M s a
1 2 a r b
) . M r r a l
1 a k a n e
) r s n g
M k g e
a M s r e :
r a a : b
k r r n 35-39% e
s k a g l
s n e o
r g : w
a r e 4
n a : 0 3
g n 5 - 5
e g 0 4 %
: e - 9
70-100% : 5 %
6 9
0 %
-
6
9

2
 Attention
to
assignment
task
Analysis
Structure
Use of
sources
References
Introductio
n
Conclusion
Spelling/Gr
ammar
Presentatio
n (Style)
* This table facilitates the assessment of your performance in selected components of your assignment, and is

designed to alert you to the general areas of strength and/ or in need of improvement in your work. Please note that

the components are not equal in terms of contribution to your overall mark. Attention to Assignment Task,

Analysis and Structure are the three most important criteria for assessment. Please note that the total mark

indicated is based on an evaluation of your overall performance in the set assignment.

SUMMARY COMMENTS

ADVICE FOR FUTURE ASSIGNMENTS

ANNOTATED FEEDBACK

(Refer to Assignment for the sections relating to the following comments)

1.

2.

3
An Experimental Approach to Analyse Success Rates in Concrete and
Abstract Selection Tasks

Charles Brand
Dublin City University

4
Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate whether people are more successful
in a reasoning task when rules involve thematic content and materials than
when the task involves abstract terms and relationships between objects.
As demonstrated by Johnson-Laird et al (1972) a higher success rate in
selection tasks was observed when realistic objects, terms and relations
were utilised in the selection test. The abstract condition test as developed
by Wason (1966) was shown to have a lower success rate than the concrete
condition test developed by Johnson-Laird et al (1972). This study required
both the concrete and abstract tests to be recreated and administered.
Results for 99 participants (n=99) were analysed. Participants ranged in
age from 18-65. Results showed a significantly higher success rate for the
concrete condition test (60%).

5
 Introduction

Early psychological theorist Ferrero (1895) studied the analytical process of

human reasoning and logic, by way of “...reflection and comparison”
(Gardiner, 1896 p. 237) and referred to this process as “arrested
mentation” (Ferrero cited in Gardiner, 1896 p. 237). Santrock (2001)
defines logic as “...the science of thinking” (p. 422). The relationship
between logic and thinking is not inter-dependent however as every person
is capable of thinking without always necessarily being logical. The place
and importance of logic within human thought processes is not generally
debated, however identifying a predominant form of reasoning and how
best to model this in relation to our cognitive architecture has interested
many researchers in the field of cognitive psychology.

Reasoning and logic are psychological by-products of thought in humans

and both processes utilise our memory stores, or knowledge. Inferences are
the means by which we use our knowledge to make decisions and
judgements about situations based on that knowledge (Evans, Newstead &
Byrne, 1993). The use of inferences is central to our reasoning capacity and
ability. Deductive inferences, a type whereby their “...conclusions
necessarily follow from their premises or assumption” (Evans, Newstead &
Byrne, 1993) are the basis for deductive reasoning. When investigating
these concepts psychological research makes a distinction between explicit
and implicit inferences. Implicit inferences relate to the internal and
unconsciousness processes that facilitate people's comprehension and
perception, whereas explicit inferences are the slower, voluntary and more
obvious processes that underlie people's problem solving methodology
(Johnson-Laird & Wason, 1977). Within experimental cognitive psychology it
is the explicit kind of inference that is usually under examination.

Early cognitive psychological experiments in reasoning and logic (see

Wordsworth & Sells, 1935) utilised a syllogistic reasoning form in order to

6
examine the explicit inferential processes that people employed. The
syllogisms they utilised for the experimental task were classic in form:
Some A are B
No C are B
Therefore
Some C are not A.
Participants in these experiments were usually asked to demonstrate
whether or not they understood the logical validity of the syllogistic
argument presented to them. This experimental methodology is still
prevalent in cognitive research today as the primary means of investigating
reasoning and logic processes in humans (Evans, Newstead & Byrne, 1993).
One reason for using a conditional format (if...then) to pose questions to
participants in experimental settings, as Wason (1966) did, is that it
minimises contextualisation of the proposition or the introduction of beliefs
on the part of the participants (Verschueren et al, 2006).

The Wason selection test (1966) examines a participants' reasoning skills by

asking them to verify that a statement was true or false from evidence
presented to them on 4 cards with numbers on one side and letters on the
other. A minimum of two cards must be turned over in order to correctly
verify the truth or falsity of the statement. Wason (1960) had conducted
earlier experiments in relation to inductive reasoning. During these
experiments he developed his concept of confirmation bias. This describes a
cognitive deficit whereby people tended to search for evidence to confirm
their hypotheses or beliefs and avoided that which did not. In the selection
test Wason attempted to illustrate the confirmation bias cognitive deficit.
The type of reasoning utilised for the experiment was proposition logic (if p
then q) and its main aim was to observe if participants would apply a
modus tollens reasoning pattern, a method by which the falsity of a
statement can be deduced (Poletiek, 2001). Wasons' (1966) selection test
demonstrated that his earlier theory on confirmation bias was valid and less
than 10% of participants chose the correct two cards.

7
Johnson-Laird, Legrenzi & Legrenzi (1972) argued that the abstract nature
of the instructions, context and materials used Wason's experiment made
success in the task unduly difficult. They proposed that using more
recognisable materials (envelopes and stamps) and introducing a more
concrete context (a postal worker scenario) instead of the abstract
number/letter combination used by Wason would yield a higher rate of
success. Their experiment was shown to support their hypothesis with a
62.5% success rate and Griggs & Cox (1982) labelled this as the thematic
materials effect. Adaptations of both the abstract and concrete selection
experiments have been developed to probe a variety of hypotheses
involving logic and reasoning. These include psychological investigations
into the reasoning structures of pathological participants (see Dudly et al,
1998), the development of the field known as conditional reasoning
research (see Verschueren, Schaeken, & Schroyens, 2006; Beller &
Kuhnmünch, 2007) as well as Wason's own modification of the original
basic form of the experiment using thematic materials (See Wason &
Shapiro, 1971).

The aim of this study was to verify that people will more often successfully
reason in a logical manner when the rules involve thematic content and
materials, as demonstrated by the Johnson-Laird et al (1972) experiment
than in the abstract condition test as developed by Wason (1966). This
required both the concrete and abstract tests to be recreated and
administered to a population sample in order to support or reject the
following hypothesis:

H1
There should be a significant difference between the rate of success on the
concrete selection task and the rate of success on the abstract selection
task.

8
Method

Design

An independent groups design was used and participants were randomly

assigned to either the abstract and concrete groups. Participants were
administered the concrete or abstract selection tests and the success rate of
each participant was then recorded. The time taken by each participant to
complete their task was also recorded.

Participants

A subset of 10 participants comprised of a self-selected sample of 10 friends

and relatives of the researcher. Of the subset, 5 participants completed the
abstract test and 5 participants completed the concrete test. Participants
were made aware before taking the tests that it was part of a psychological
experiment.

Male = 6 (4 abstract condition & 2 concrete condition).

Female = 4 (1 abstract condition & 3 concrete condition).
Age Range = 21-63

Participants in the subset received no incentive in order to take part in the

experiment. Occupational status of participants in the subset were as
follows:
Unemployed = 1
Student = 1
Professional musician = 1
Engineer = 1
Publican = 1
Home Makers = 2
Property Developer = 1
Sales Executive = 1
University Lecturer/Researcher = 1

9
 Participants in the remainder of the sample comprised a self-selected
sample of 89 friends and relatives of the students from the Oscail Cognitive
Psychology class, Group 1.
Males = 37
Females = 55
Age Range = 18-65

Results of subset tests were incorporated into the over-all sample and
yielded the follow results:
Abstract condition = 49 participants.
Concrete condition = 50 participants.

Materials

See details see Appendix B

Procedure

Participants were tested concurrently and in the same room. As each

participant entered the room they were seated and the following statement
was made by the researcher in order to address any pre-test anxiety with
regard to under performance on the test:
“Thank you for agreeing to take part in this psychological experiment. This
test is a cognitive test concerned with finding out about how people use
logic and reasoning to solve problems. The test you are about to take has
been used to evaluate this issue for over 40 years and literally millions of
people have taken it. While I'm sure that you will be trying to get the
correct solution to the test, I would like to stress that failure or success is
not the primary question that the experiment is concerned with. This
research is mainly concerned with why people reason in the way that they
do.”

10
Participants were then requested to sign a consent form (see appendix B).
Participants were allocated to either the abstract or concrete test by means
of a lottery using the relevant aforementioned materials.

The materials for both the abstract and concrete tests were pre-prepared on
the table, facing the participant and under a large enough cloth sheet to
cover both sets of test materials. Upon allocation to each test as per the
lottery procedure, the instruction sheet for each test was then placed in
front of the participant face down.

Abstract test
The following instruction was given to each participant:
“Please turn over the [statement] sheet, read the instructions and when
you're satisfied that you understand the instruction let me know.”
Once the participant indicated they understood the instruction on the
instruction sheet the cloth sheet was folded back to reveal the set of
abstract cards. The stopwatch was then started. The stopwatch was stopped
once they indicated that they had turned over as many cards that they felt
had verified the statement on the statement sheet to be either true or false.
The configuration of the cards was as follows:

Corresponding numbers or letters on the opposite side:

8 5 E Q

Concrete test
The following instruction was given to each participant:
“We're going to pretend that you work in a post office sorting depot. You
are seated in front of a conveyor belt and your job is to inspect letters as

11
 they pass to ensure they adhere to certain rules about the type of stamps
that are put on envelopes depending on whether they're open or closed. On
the instruction sheet is a rule that has to be verified”. Once the participant
indicated they understood the instruction on the instruction sheet the cloth
sheet was folded back to reveal the set of envelopes. The stopwatch was
then started. The stopwatch was stopped once they indicated that they had
chosen as many envelopes that they felt had verified the statement on the
statement sheet to be either true or false. The configuration of open/closed
envelopes, stamp showing/stamp not showing and stamp type was as
follows:

Visibly Sealed Visibly Unsealed Not visibly Unsealed Not visibly Sealed

Stamp face down Stamp face down Stamp face up Stamp face up

55c 10c 55c 5c

Many participants in both test types looked to the researcher for

confirmation of the correctness of their choices after selecting one, two
three or all four cards or envelopes by asking “Is that right?” or “do I need
to keep going?”. If this happened the researcher said “If you're satisfied
that your current selection verifies or falsifies the statement on the
statement sheet then the test is over”.

Once the stopwatch was stopped participant details such as time taken to
complete the test, age, success rate and occupational status were recorded.
Participants were then invited to ask any questions they may have about
the particular test they completed or the experiment in general. Once this
discussion was complete a debriefing sheet (see appendix C) was given to
each participant.

12
Results

In order to successfully verify the truth or falsity of the statement on the

statement sheet for both tests 2 cards or envelopes must to be turned over
and checked by participants. Data from 99 participants was included in the
analysis. Success and failure rates for each of the tests are
included in Table 1 and Figure 1:

Table 1 - Success and Failure Rates for Abstract and Concrete Conditions

Test Condition Number of Participants Number Successful Number Failed

Abstract 49 4 45
Concrete 50 32 18

4
Abstract Condition
18
Success
Concrete Condidtion
Success
Abstract Condition
32 Failure
Concrete Condidtion
Failure

45

Figure 1 - Success and Failure Rates for Abstract and Concrete Conditions

The failure rate for the abstract condition was 60% higher than that of the
concrete failure rate. The success rate for the concrete condition was 87.5%
higher than that of the abstract condition.

13
The frequency of the number of cards/envelopes chosen by each participant
for the each selection test is detailed in Table 2, Table 3 and Figure 2. For
both the concrete and abstract conditions combined, participants selected,
on average, the correct number of cards/envelopes on 36.5% of tests.
Table 2 - Number of Cards Turned by Frequency

Abstract Condition - Number of Cards Turned by Frequency

1 card 11
2 cards 31
3 cards 1
4 cards 6
total 49

Table 3 - Number of Envelopes Turned by Frequency

Concrete Condition - Number of Envelopes Turned by Frequency

1 card 6
2 cards 42
3 cards 2
4 cards 0
total 50

45

40
Number of Participants

35

30

25
Concrete Condition
20 Abstract condition
15

10

0
1 Card/envelope 2 cards/envelope 3 cards envelopes 4 cards/envelopes

Figure 2 - Number of Cards and Envelopes Turned by Frequency

14
The time ranges participants for completion of the tests in the overall
sample are shown in Table 4
Table 4 – Time Ranges for Completion of Each Condition

Abstract time range 15-660 seconds

Concrete time range 2-700 seconds

Mean times for completion of the tests are shown in Table 5

Table 5 – Mean Times for the Completion of Each Condition

Abstract 155.02
Concrete 140.06

A Mann-Whitney U Test was conducted on the overall success rate for the
participants in both the abstract and concrete conditions. The participants
in the concrete condition were significantly more successful at choosing the
correct cards than were those in the abstract condition U(97) = 541.00, z=
-5.75, p ,.001 two-tailed.

Ranks
Condition N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks
Overall Success Abstract 49 63.96 3134.00
dimension1
Concrete 50 36.32 1816.00

Total 99

Test Statistics

Overall Success

Mann-Whitney U 541.000

Wilcoxon W 1816.000

Z -5.745

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000

a. Grouping Variable: Condition

15
Discussion

Figure 1 shows a significantly higher rate of success for participants in the

concrete condition test than for participants in the abstract condition test.
While a significant majority of participants selected the correct number of
cards/envelopes in both the abstract and concrete conditions, a higher
proportion of participants in the abstract condition were more likely to
choose either too few or too many cards as shown in Figure 2. Also, the
total completion time ranges as shown in Table 4 indicate that some
participants in the abstract condition required less overall time to complete
the test. However, once the mean time for completion, as shown in Table 5
and the minimum time required for some participants in the concrete test,
as shown in Table 4 is considered, it can be observed that participants in
the concrete condition took less time on average to complete the test and
some took up to 60% less time to complete the test.

The Wason (1966) card selection test and envelope selection test developed
by Johnson-Laird et al (1972) were recreated in order to verify that the use
of thematic materials would increase the success rate of the participants in
this condition. A significant difference was observed between success rates
for the concrete and abstract selection tests with a statistical chance of the
difference being due to chance being less than 1% (P>00.1). The resultant
z value (z> 1.96) suggest that the null hypothesis can be rejected.

The higher success rate for the concrete test is in-line with similar
experimental results (see johnson-Laird et al, 1972). The possible causes of
a higher success rate in this study may have been due to a number of
possible factors and is not conclusive. The question considered relevant in
order to better understand possible reasons for the difference in success
rates was: whether it was the terms or relationships between the terms
used in the experiments i.e. envelopes and stamps as opposed to letters,
vowels and consonants that facilitated a higher success rate in the concrete
condition test (Johnson-Laird & Wason, 1977). Bracewell & Hidi (1974)
found that only the relation between terms that provided insight to the

16
participants and could be responsible for the higher success rate. Gilhooly &
Falconer (1974) found opposing evidence in their experiment which
suggested that the realistic nature of the terms was a more important factor
in participants successfully completing the concrete condition test. Van
Duyne (1976) somewhat reconciled these dichotomous experimental results
by suggesting that a more complex process was involved that introduced
degrees of realism which affected participants performance.

The impact of these factors on the results of this study are, however
mitigated by a lack of test reliability and procedural consistency.
Participants in this study varied in the number of cards and envelopes they
turned over before they were satisfied that they had verified that the
statement on the statement sheet. Due to a lack of complete procedural
data pertaining to the order in which the cards and envelopes were placed
in front of all participants, no statistical information can be calculated in
relation to the frequency of particular selection combinations or sequence of
selections. A number of different researchers were responsible for
conducting all of the tests but without a single definition of test
requirements or test materials e.g. type of timing device, when to begin and
end the timing sequence. Test location was also highly varied and
conceptual problems regarding the methodology of administering the test to
participants were also observed. Ethical concerns regarding the nature of
the tests aired by some researchers may have distorted the delivery of
instructions to participants and due to the fact that family members of
researchers were used as participants may have also introduced anomalous
behaviour on the part of the researchers, All these confounds render the
test results unreliable.

17
References

Bracewell, R. J. and Hidi, S. E.(1974) The solution of an inferential problem

as a function of stimulus materials. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 26 (3), 480 -488.
Beller, S., Kunmünch, G. (2007) What Causal Conditional Reasoning Tells
Us About People’s Understanding of Causality. Thinking and Reasoning, 13
(4), 426 – 460.
Evans, J. St., B. P., Newstead, E., Byrne, R. M. J.(1993) Human reasoning:
The psychology of deduction. Hove, England:Erlbaum.
Gardiner, H. N. (1896) Psychological literature: Arrested mentation.
[Review of the article Ferrero, G. (1895). Arrested Mentation. The
Monist, Vol. 6, 60-75.] October, 1895 Psychological Review, 3(2), 237.
Gilhooly, K.J., Falconer, K.A. (1974) Concrete and Abstract Terms and
Relations in Testing a Rule. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 26, (3), 355-359.
Griggs, R. A., Cox, J. R. (1982) The elusive thematic-materials effect in
Wason's selection task. British Journal of Psychology, 73(3), 407-420.
Johnson-Laird, P.N., Legrenzi, P., Legrenzi, M.S.(1972) Reasoning and a
sense of reality. British Journal of Psychology,63(3), 395-400.
Johnson-Laird, P.N., Wason, P.C. (1977). Reasoning with Quantifiers In
P.N. Johnson-Laird & P.C. Wason (Eds) Thinking: Readings in Cognitive
Science. Bath, U.K.:Cambridge University Press. pp. 307-326.
Poletiek, F. (2001) Hypothesis-testing behaviour-Essays in cognitive
psychology. East Sussex, U.K.:Psychology Press.
Santrock, R.L. (2001). Cognitive Psychology. Boston, MA:Allyn & Beacon.
Van Duyne, P.C. (1974) Realism and Linguistic Complexity in Reasoning.
British Journal of Psychology, 65(1), 59-67.
Verschueren, N., Schaeken, W., Schroyens, W. (2006). Necessity and
Sufficiency in Abstract Conditional Reasoning. European Journal of
Cognitive Psychology, 18 (2), 255-276.
Wason, P.C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual
task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129-140.

18
Wason, P.C. (1966). Reasoning. In Foss, B. M. (Eds), New horizons in
psychology. Harmondsworth, U.K.:Penguin.
Wason, P.C., Shapiro, D. (1971). Natural and Contrived Experience in a
Reasoning Problem. Quarterly Journal Of Experimental Psychology, 23, 63-
71.

19
 Appendix A

LETTER OF CONSENT

Re: Wason Selection Test – Humanities Degree Program (HONS) Oscail Psychology 4 Research

This research is being undertaken by Charles Brand, who is a student at Dublin City

University, Dublin 9.

The study will examine the logical thinking and reasoning by way of a card selection

test. The test will take no longer than 10 minutes and involves nothing more than

participants selecting either cards or envelopes from a selection.

If you agree to participate in this study your identity will be coded for anonimity

purposes and the information that you provide will be destroyed immediately after

inputting into a dataset. You will be at liberty to withdraw from the study at any time

without prejudice. Your rights under the Freedom of Information Act 1977 (amended

2003) will be respected at all times.

Charles Brand,

c/o Oscail, Dublin City University, Dublin 9.

e-mail: Charlesbrand@gmail.com

Please place an X in the box to indicate that you have read and understood the above and that you

agree to participate in this study.

20
Appendix B

Materials required for the concrete test consisted of:

• 4 plain white envelopes
• 4 postage stamps – 2 stamps 55c, 1 stamp 10c, 1 stamp 5c.
• 1 A4 plain white paper sheet containing the following statement: “Which
envelope(s) would you choose to verify if the following rule is true? 'If the
envelope is sealed, then it must have a 55c stamp on it'”.

Materials required for the abstract test consisted of:

• 4 plain white A3 cards with numbers on one side and and letters on the
opposite side in the following configuration:
• A:8 B:5 4:E 7:Q
• 1 A4 plain white paper sheet containing the following statement: “Which
card(s) must be turned over to verify that the following statement is true?
'If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the
other side'”.

1 consent form per participants.

1 debriefing form per participant.
1 stopwatch to record completion times for all test attempts by participants.
A software model was used at http://http://www.online-stopwatch.com/
1 laptop (model Dell Latitude E6400I RAM-2Gb. Processor Core Duo
P8600@2.4 Ghz Centrino. Operating system - Windows Vista Business).
1 table big enough to hold both sets of test cards and envelopes.
1 dark coloured cloth sheet, big enough to cover the table.
5 post-its© containing the letter C and 5 post-its© containing the letter A
for test type allocation lottery.

All participants were tested in the same room which was brightly lit. All
participants sat opposite the researcher who was seated with their back to a
dark coloured wall with no windows.

21
 Appendix C

Debriefing Sheet

Thank you for participating in this research.

The study examined how people use their logic and reasoning skills in relation to

concrete and abstract problems.

The test that you completed was developed in order for psychologists to better

understand how we utilise different aspects of our knowledge to reason and perform

logical tasks. Success or failure by the participants in the test is not the only or

primary concern. The process by which participants come to their conclusions are of

most relevance to helping improve our understanding of our mental processes.

Further information and results can be obtained by contacting

Charles Brand,

c/o Oscail, Dublin City University, Dublin 9.

e-mail: Charlesbrand@gmail.com

Should you have been affected by any of the issues touched upon in this study, the following services are

available to you:

Samaritans – jo@samaritans.org Tel: Lo-Call - 1850 609090

22