Incorporating inferences in narrative representations: A study of how and why

Four experiments examined the conceptual organization of narrative passages and the extent to which these representations were explanatory in a variety of experimental tasks. The conceptual representation of a passage consisted of a graph of labeled nodes and labeled, directed arcs which were adopted from the Conceptual Dependency Theory. These representations included both explicitly stated information and inferences which had been empirically extracted by a question-answering procedure. Symbolic procedures for answering how- and why-questions were also delineated. The conceptual representations and the symbolic procedures that operate on these representations together accounted for 91% of the answers generated from question-answering protocols in Experiment 1, and also the rated quality of specific answers to specific questions in Experiment 2. Experiments 3 and 4 supported the hypothesis that structural properties of the representations can predict recall of explicitly stated nodes and verification ratings of inference nodes. The results provide encouraging support for the proposed graphic representations and also for the use of question-answering protocols in uncovering prose inferences.     

The effect of thematic content on the ‘Wason selection task’

This paper concerns the differential effects of use of ‘thematic’, rather than abstract (symbolic), content on the ‘Wason selection task’. An effect of thematic content has been reported several times, originally by Wason & Shapiro (1971), but Manktelow & Evans (1979) report five experiments that failed to obtain an effect and argue against the validity of the content effect in general. However, it is pointed out that four of their experiments use a novel content and that there are previous reports of non-effective content in the literature. It is concluded that a particular type of thematic content cannot be treated as a ‘random sample’ of thematic content in general, and that their argument thus rests upon their failure to produce an effect of the specific (’towns and transport’) content used by Wason and Shapiro. This produces an essentially empirical controversy which is settled in two ways. First, Manktelow and Evans’s criticisms of two previous replications are shown to be misleading. Second, an experiment is reported that exactly copies the Wason and Shapiro design and produces a significant effect of content. It is concluded that the Manktelow and Evans result most probably was due to a Type 2 error. Finally, a hypothesis is developed to account for both the effect of certain types of content and the lack of effect of others, including that used in Manktelow and Evans’s first four experiments.     

Effects of food priming on instrumental acquisition and performance

Four experiments investigated the effects of a priming food reinforcement, given 0 or 75 sec pretrial, on runway performance of rats. The studies differed in the use of between-versus-within-subject designs, and by using food or water as the goal reinforcer. In Experiment 1, using food as the goal reward, subjects primed with food 0 sec pretrial conditioned slower than subjects primed 75 sec pretrial. In Experiment 2, using water as the goal reward, subjects primed with food 0 sec pretrial conditioned faster. These differences were evident on both prefed trials and on nonprefed test trials. Experiments 3 and 4 showed an opposite pattern of results when within-subject comparisons of 0- and 75-sec pretrial intervals were used: Food priming immediately pretrial facilitated food-rewarded running but inhibited water-rewarded running. The results suggest prefeeding has differential effects on acquisition and performance of instrumental behavior, and also depending upon the similarity of the priming and goal reinforcers.     

On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning

Three experiments are reported that investigate the weighting attached to logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning. Substantial belief biases were observed despite controls for possible conversions of the premises. Equally substantial effects of logic were observed despite controls for two possible response biases. A consistent interaction between belief and logic was also recorded; belief bias was more marked on invalid than on valid syllogisms. In all experiments, verbal protocols were recorded and analyzed. These protocols are interpreted in some cases as providing rationalizations for prejudiced decisions and, in other cases, as reflecting a genuine process of premise to conclusion reasoning. In the latter cases, belief bias was minimal but still present. Similarly, even subjects who focus primarily on the conclusion are influenced to an extent by the logic. Thus a conflict between logic and belief is observed throughout, but at several levels of extent.     

Use of the family adaptability and cohesion evaluation scales in child clinical research

Although the FACES has become a widely used instrument for assessing children's family relations, the possible linearity vs. curvilinearity of its cohesion and adaptability scales has been treated inconsistently by investigators. This study evaluated whether samples of adolescent repeat offenders, young adult prisoners, and adolescent nonoffenders were discriminated better by a linear or curvilinear treatment of the FACES scores. Between-groups comparisons showed that significant effects were observed for each of the three curvilinear measures (cohesion-curvilinear, adaptability-curvilinear, distance-from-center) and only one of the two linear measures (cohesionlinear). These findings support the superiority of a curvilinear treatment of the FACES. In light of these findings, it is suggested that investigators who use FACES evaluate the linearity of the scales and determine whether a linear or curvilinear treatment of the data produces more meaningful results.