| Abstract: | In an attempt to improve logical reasoning performances, 64 introductory psychology students were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The experimental condition involved solving logic syllogisms when the obvious “logical error” was not included as a possible answer. Control subjects solved the same problems with the “logical error” included as a choice. An analysis of variance procedure applied to the subjects' logic pretest-posttest gain scores indicated that the experimental group did significantly better than the control group on invalid principles. The results were discussed in terms of Piaget's theory of logical thinking and the possibility of performance rather than competence problems in adult reasoning. The need to develop more effective instructional techniques to enhance transfer of learning was underscored. |
