Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
4
Discussions
The present study addressed the figural effects in syllogistic reasoning with
the conclusion-evaluation paradigm and simultaneous presentation of premises
and conclusion using eye-movement technique. The eye-movement methodology
could ensure reliable inspection time analysis. The statistical results of correct-
ness and response times showed that the figure P-M/M-S/S-P was more cogni-
tively demanding than the figure M-P/S-M/S-P. The result was consistent with
ones reported by Frase [9]. At the same time, this result did not confirm the MMT
prediction that the figure P-M/M-S is easier than figure M-P/S-M [12,13]. Our
recent fMRI study about figural effects showed similar results that the figure P-
M/M-S/S-P, which seemed backward-chaining processing, was more cognitively
demanding than the figure M-P/S-M/S-P, which was a kind of forward-chaining
processing [11]. The details will be discussed in the following analysis.
4.1 Early and Late Processes Analysis
The early processes implicated the initial presentation of problems and the late
processes referred to the information integration. Both early and late processes
showed that the figure P-M/M-S/S-P was more cognitively demanding than the
figure M-P/S-M/S-P. The results did not support the critical MMT prediction
that additional mental manipulations are required to align such noncontiguous
middle terms for figure M-P/S-M [12]. Meanwhile, the result gave a hint that the
processing might be different between the conclusion-evaluation and conclusion-
generation paradigms [4].
It might be reasonable to consider following issues: (1) Conclusion-generation
was considered to be premise-driven processing in which the contiguous middle
terms of the figure P-M/M-S was less cognitively demanding. (2) Conclusion-
evaluation was considered as conclusion-driven processing in which the conclu-
sion might offer a heuristic strategy. Thus, the figure P-M/M-S/S-P was more
cognitive load, like backward-chaining processing with the response chain of
P-M-S. On the contrary, the figure M-P/S-M/S-P might be forward-chaining
processing with response chain of S-M-P. (3)In Espino's [4] study the premises
were displayed in a line, that is, the terms of S, M, P were displayed in a one-
dimension view in which it might be more cognitively demanding and visual load
when integrating the figure M-P/S-M with the noncontiguous middle terms than
the figure P-M/M-S with contiguous middle terms; whereas, in our experiments
the premises and the conclusion were displayed in three lines. The terms of S, M,
P were displayed in a two-dimension view in which the differences in visual load
were diminished. According to the analysis, the results were consistent with ones
reported by Frase [9] that figure P-M/M-S/S-P was more cognitively demanding,
and challenged the prediction of MMT.
4.2 Conclusion-Driven Processing Analysis
In order to clarify the impact of conclusion on figural effects in syllogistic reason-
ing, we did the pre-conclusion and post-conclusion viewing analysis. The results
