Experimental Studies On The Processes And Development Of Implicit Learning Of Implication

We often thirk tha peOple have reason. In faCt Wha we really believe is tha the wayone speak and beheve is signifiCant or confOrm tO logic. The psychDelogic, Which isstUdied by psycho1ogiSt, is not as the same as the formal logic tha is studied bylogicha Having the aid of lanW. people develop their own natUr psycho-logicsyStem through PraChce and Anon. Ths psycho-logic SySem consiSts of some basiclogital-matheYnatical categories, such as entity ekiStene, property causality necessityand Whole. It also includes some logical relationship, such as driPlicatiory non-implicatioR reciprocaI driphcation. negation of reciprocal irnplicalloft incomPatibility,disjunchon. conjwton, and equlvalence. Jean Piaget suPPOsed that refleedveabwton is the mechasm of the acqulsihon of these klnds of CategOries. But hedid nOt give us any PSychological evidence about his theory.ffe PriInary aim of this dissehation is to describe and exarnine the natUr. origift anddeveloPment of imPlication. lmplication is a key category in the pSycho-logic systemand plays an mprtan role in deduCtive reasoning. Our exPerimental studies consistof three different but conneCtive exPeriInents. On one han4 we try to integratePiagetha nd some modern coghhve psychology methods (some matUr boPllcitllerng StUdy pedgIn) so tha we can find some new evidence to suPPOrt the theoryof refleetive abshaction. On the other hand. we try to enrich the theory base ofcontemPOrary implicit ledng StUdy through our research.In our research we define imPlication as a reation that when "complete". gives rise tothe same inferenes as material twlication. There are four standard sy1logismWents aroUnd a thement of imPlicatiory each of chch consiStS of a InaorPremise, and a conclusion. These aret modus POnens (i.e., If p then q, p is tu,therefOre. q is tw), denial of antecednt (i.e., If p then q, notp is true. q isindetendnate), mprmation ofconsequent (i.e.. If p then q, q is tnJe. p is indeerminate),moduS tollens (i.e., If p then q, notq is tw. therefore. p is not true).Our stUdy chose three sets of subject. They are younger children (8 years old), olderchildren (12 years old), and undergradUate Students (above l8years old). SubeC'tSwt11 1esrn thAca ivifProoPPq imnliexPlicitly, according tO different kind of inmctions. In exP1icit lcahong condition,we ask subjectS tO figUre out the reledonship bebeen ndedent and conSequentachve1y However, in implicit ledng taSk. we infOrm subectS to make choice onthe basis of their Preference and to tIy their best tO memohae the right answers.In the thet exPerimenL we find not Ouly the resultS but also the Procedure that theimplicit ledng is much better than the exPlicit learning. Older subjeCtS'peffonnance is beder than younger ones. But moduS ponens is an excePtion. becausethere is no significance ditheence among all these experiInntal treatInnts. 1n thesecond exPeriInent. we verify our hyPOthesis again. Those infernces included in theconcePt of irnplication can be leamed unconsciously Fdrirmore, another evidencewe find is tha the meaning betWeen the Mdent and the conclusion Plays animPOrtan role when subjectS leam these inference rules. Generally sPeallng. themore concrete the medng, the haer the ledring. Through clAncal analysis, wefind that subjeCts usually attriute causality or lOgical consequence tO imPlication whenthere is more concrete medngS between the anteCeden and conseqUence in commonsense. ms kind of attribution helps them a lot esPeCially in leaming those inferencestha inVo1ved negation In our thjTd experiInental StUdy we focus the PrOblem oftranSference. Although it shows tranfer speCificity in some degf'ee, the AnowledgeacqUired through driPlicit 1eaming does trifer nOt Ouly within the domain. but alsoacross the doler at leaSt in our StUdyAner careAnly anaghng the results of these ewtents, we con1ude those 1ogical-InathInaticaI categories such as irnplication are fnainly acqulred by un...