Reasoning Abilities

David F. Lohman
Psychological & Quantitative Foundations
College of Education
University of Iowa

김민경
2008. 9. 25

Reasoning Abilities Slide #1

 Human Intelligence

• Complex human behavior as indicants of intelligence

Not Appropriate Appropriate

• Faster or more efficient processing of • The writing of novels

elementary tasks • The solving of complex math. Problems
• The efficiency of biological process • The designing of skyscrapers & microchips

• Two main facts for the theory of intelligence

(1) Understanding how individuals solve complex tasks
(2) Why individuals differ in their abilities

Reasoning Abilities Slide #2

 Then, which tasks should we study?

• There are unlimited numbers of complex tasks

• Cognitive Tests as Cognitive Tasks (complex human behavior)
• Three important features (Snow, Kyllonen, & Marshalek, 1984)
• Test cluster by content (Verbal, Spatial, Quantitative)
• Test cluster defining broad factors tend to fall near the center (G)
• Test complexity is roughly related to distance from the center (G)

Verbal Nonverbal
(ex) sentence completion tests, g (ex) form boards tests
sentence comprehension tests

Quantitative (ex) making relational judgments

(greater than or less than)

Reasoning Abilities Slide #3

 Measures of reasoning

• Many different tests have been used to measure reasoning

• ex) Analogy, Series Completion, Classification  most commonly used

• Position of Reasoning
• Sternberg (1986)
• Intelligence  The amount of reasoning involved in a given task

• Gustaffson (1988)
• General mental ability (G) ≈ Fluid ability (Gf) ≈ Inductive Reasoning (I)

• Inductive reasoning – primary ability most commonly associated with G

Reasoning Abilities Slide #4

 Measures of Reasoning:
Fluid-Crystallized Continuum (1/2)
• Cognitive and Physical skills develop munch in the same way
• Test of general fluid abilities are akin to measures of general physical fitness
• Measures of crystallized achievements are like observed proficiencies in sports
• Individuals with high level of fitness  easier to learn physically demanding activities
• Individuals with reason well  learn more quickly and perform at higher levels

Fluid Crystallized
Science Social studies
achievement achievement Specific
Cognitive General fluid factual
ability (Gf) Math knowledge
abilities achievement Knowledge of
literature

Basketball Football
Physical General Volleyball
physical Swimming
skills fitness
Field hockey Cycling
Wrestling

Reasoning Abilities Slide #5

 Measures of Reasoning:
Fluid-Crystallized Continuum (2/2)
• Physical fitness is an outcome of participation in physically demanding activities
• Students who participate in competitive swimming not only become better swimmers, but
also improve their overall levels of physical fitness
• Fluid abilities are also outcome of crystallized achievement
• Students who learn how to prove theorems in a class also learn how to reason in more
sophisticated ways.
• All abilities (physical & cognitive) are developed through exercise and experience.

Fluid Crystallized
Science Social studies
achievement achievement Specific
Cognitive General fluid factual
ability (Gf) Math knowledge
abilities achievement Knowledge of
literature

Basketball Football
Physical General Volleyball
physical Swimming
skills fitness
Field hockey Cycling
Wrestling

Reasoning Abilities Slide #6

 Reasoning Abilities are…

• Reasoning abilities are

• Critical aptitudes for learning difficult material
• Important outcomes of such learning

• Common Misunderstanding
• Ability 와 Knowledge 는 별개의 것
• A ability test measures (or ought to measure) the innate potential or
capacity of the learner, whereas a achievement test measures (or ought
to measure) only knowledge and skill acquired through formal
schooling.

Reasoning Abilities Slide #7

 • Two main facts for the theory of intelligence
(1) Understanding how individuals solve complex tasks
(2) Why individuals differ in their abilities

Reasoning Abilities Slide #8

 The role of knowledge in reasoning

• Reasoning well in domains of non-trivial complexity depends

importantly on knowledge.
• An sophisticated knowledge base supports sophisticated forms
of reasoning
• Formation of moderately abstract conceptual relations
Detect coherent patterns
Easier to retain and manipulate in working memory
** Experts: more abstract formation of problem representation than novices
• Important synergy between good knowledge and good reasoning

Reasoning Abilities Slide #9

 Processes in Reasoning Tasks (1/2)
• Inductive Reasoning Tasks – 4 Types of processes
(1) Encoding Process (Attribute Discovery)
(2) Inference Process (Attribute Comparison)
(3) Relation Process (Rule Evaluation)
(4) Decision Process (Response Process)
• Representatively, Analogy, Series Completion, Classification
• Ex1) Analogy [A is to B as C is to B]
• Encoding Process: Create mental representation of stimuli (terms)
• Inference Process: Determine the relationship between two terms
• Ex2) Series Problems [(Given 3,4,6,9,13. What comes next?]
• Inference Process: Identify the pattern in a sequence of letters or numbers
• Ex3) Classification Problems [apple pear, banana  belongs: Orange or Pea]
• Inference Process: Identify a category

Reasoning Abilities Slide #10

 Processes in Reasoning Tasks (2/2)

• Pellegrino (1985)
• One of the most important aspects of inductive reasoning is the ability to create
complex relationship structure in memory and to determine their consistency.
• Errors occur when working memory resources are exceeded.

• Sternberg (1986), 3 Types in Reasoning Process

(1) Selective Encoding: Distinguishing relevant from irrelevant information
(2) Selective Comparison: Deciding what mentally stored information is relevant for
solving a problem
(3) Selective Combination: Combining selective encoded or compared information in
working memory
• Inductive vs. Deductive
• Inductive - Selective encoding & comparison processes
• Deductive – Selective combination process

Reasoning Abilities Slide #11

 • Two main facts for the theory of intelligence
(1) Understanding how individuals solve complex tasks
(2) Why individuals differ in their abilities

Reasoning Abilities Slide #12

 Working Memory Capacity

• Individual differences in reasoning processes may primarily reflect

individual differences in working memory resources.
• Hunt & Lansman (1982)
• Higher correlations with G require more attentional resources
• A major source of individual differences on reasoning tasks lies in
• How much information one must maintain in working memory, especially while
effecting some transformation of that information

Reasoning Abilities Slide #13

 Limitations of the information-processing
paradigm

(a) The neglect of affect and conation

(b) The failure to understand the contextual specificity of abilities

• A theory of G must explain individual differences in problem solving not
only on tests, but in school and other everyday contexts.

Reasoning Abilities Slide #14

 Conclusion

• Reasoning abilities are not static but developed through

experience.
• Prior knowledge and skill are critical to determine the level of
reasoning.
• Individual differences in reasoning are correlated with the amount
of information individuals can hold in working memory while
performing some transformation on it.
• Important usage of reasoning ability test  an indicator of
readiness to discover what to do in situations
• Good reasoning tests shows smaller differences between majority and
minority students than good achievement tests

Reasoning Abilities Slide #15