Wason’s selection task requires that one imagine which of four cards, each of which has a letter on one side and a number on the other, one would have to turn over to determine whether a statement about the cards is true or false. For example, one might see four cards showing T, H, 6, and 4 and be asked to say which card or cards one would have to turn over to determine whether a statement in the form of If a card has T on one side, it has 4 on the other is true. In the great majority of experiments with this task no cards are actually turned. This limits the conclusions that can be drawn from experimental results. In two experiments participants actually turned (had a computer turn) virtual cards so as to show what they contained on their originally hidden sides. Participants were given a monetary incentive to do well on the task, and they performed it, with trial-by-trial feedback, many times. Performance was much better than is typically obtained with the more common way of performing the task. Results also demonstrate the importance of the precise wording of the statement to be evaluated and how a misinterpretation could help account for a tendency for people to turn only a single card even when the turning of two is required. Results prompt several questions of a theoretical nature and are discussed as they relate to recent theoretical treatments of the selection task.
AdamsE. W. (1975). The logic of conditionals: An application of probability to deductive logic. Reidel.
2.
AdamsE. W. (1996). A primer of probability logic. Center for the Study of Language and Information.
3.
ChaterN.OaksfordM. (2001). Human rationality and the psychology of reasoning: Where do we go from here?British Journal of Psychology, 92, 193–216.
4.
ClarkH. H.ChaseW. G. (1972). On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 472–517.
5.
CosmidesL. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31, 187–276.
6.
DouvenI. (2017). How to account for the oddness of missing-link conditionals. Synthese, 194, 1541–1554.
7.
DouvenI.ElqayamS.SingmannH.van Wijnbergen-HuitinkJ. (2018). Conditionals and inferential connections: A hypothetical inferential theory. Cognitive Psychology, 101, 50–81.
8.
EvansJ. S. B. T. (1972). Interpretation and matching bias in a reasoning task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 193–199.
9.
EvansJ. S. B. T. (1998). Matching bias in conditional reasoning: Do we understand it after 25 years?Thinking and Reasoning, 4, 45–82.
10.
EvansJ. S. B. T.BallL. J.BrooksP. O. (1987). Attentional bias and decision order in a reasoning task. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 385–394.
11.
EvansJ. S. B. T.LynchJ. S. (1973). Matching bias in the selection task. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 391–397.
12.
EvansJ. S. B. T.OverD. (2004). If. Oxford University Press.
13.
FedorovV. V. (1972). Theory of optimal experiments. Academic Press.
GigerenzerG.HugK. (1992). Domain-specific reasoning: Social contracts, cheating, and perspective change. Cognition, 43, 127–171.
16.
GilbertD. T. (1991). How mental systems believe. American Psychologist, 46, 107–119.
17.
GirottoV.LightP.ColbourneC. J. (1988). Pragmatic schemas and conditional reasoning in children. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 40(A), 469–482.
18.
GirottoV.MazzoccoA.TassoA. (1997). The effect of premise order in conditional reasoning: A test of the mental model theory. Cognition, 63, 1–28.
19.
Johnson-LairdP. N.WasonP. C. (1970a). Insight into a logical relation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22, 49–61.
20.
Johnson-LairdP. N.WasonP. C. (1970b). A theoretical analysis of insight into a reasoning task. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 134–138.
21.
KirbyK. N. (1994). Probabilities and utilities of fictional outcomes in Wason’s four-card selection task. Cognition, 51, 1–28.
22.
KrzyzanowskaK.CollinsP.HahnU. (2017). Between a conditional’s antecedent and its consequent: Discourse coherence vs. probabilistic relevance. Cognition, 164, 199–205.
23.
KrzyzanowskaK.WenmackersS.DouvenI. (2013). Inferential conditionals and evidentiality. Springer.
24.
LamingD. (1996). On the analysis of irrational data selection. A critique of Oaksford and Chater (1994). Psychological Review, 103, 364–373.
25.
LunzerE. A.HarrisonC.DaveyM. (1972). The four-card problem and the generality of formal reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 326–339.
26.
MacKayD. J. C. (1992). Bayesian methods for adaptive models [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. California Institute of Technology.
27.
NickersonR. S. (1996). Hemple’s paradox and Wason’s selection task: Logical and psychological puzzles of confirmation. Thinking and Reasoning, 2, 1–31.
28.
NickersonR. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.
29.
OakhillJ. V.Johnson-LairdP. N. (1985). Rationality, memory and the search for counterexamples. Cognition, 20, 79–94.
30.
OaksfordM.CharterN.GraingerB.LarkinJ. (1997). Optimal data selection in the Reduced Array Selection Task (RAST). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23, 441–458.
31.
OaksfordM.ChaterN. (1994). A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. Psychological Review, 101, 608–631.
32.
OaksfordM.ChaterN. (2007). Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Oxford University Press.
33.
OaksfordM.ChaterN. (2009). Précis of Bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 69–120.
34.
OaksfordM.ChaterN. (2018). Probabilities and Bayesian rationality. In BallL. J.ThompsonV. A. (Eds.), International handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 415–433). Psychology Press.
35.
OberauerK.WeidenfeldA.FischerK. (2007). What makes us believe a conditional? The roles of covariation and causality. Thinking and Reasoning, 13, 340–369.
36.
OsmanM.LamingD. (2001). Misinterpretation of conditional statements in Wason’s selection task. Psychological Research, 65, 128–144.
37.
OverD. E.CruzN. (2018). Probabilistic accounts of conditional reasoning. In BallL. J.ThompsonV. A. (Eds.), International handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 434–450). Psychology Press.
38.
OverD. E.HadjichristidisC.EvansJ. S. B. T.HandleyS. J.SlomanS. A. (2007). The probability of causal conditionals. Cognitive Psychology, 54, 62–97.
39.
PlattR. D.GriggsR. A. (1995). Facilitation and matching bias in the abstract selection task. Thinking and Reasoning, 1, 55–70.
40.
RagniM.KolaI.Johnson-LairdP. N. (2018). On selecting evidence to test hypotheses: A theory of selection tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 779–796.
41.
RothE. M. (1979). Facilitating insight in a reasoning task. British Journal of Psychology, 70, 265–271.
42.
ShannonC. E.WeaverW. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press.
43.
Skovgaard-OlsenN.SingmannH.KlauerK. C. (2016a). Relevance and reason relations. Cognitive Science, 41, 1202–1215.
44.
Skovgaard-OlsenN.SingmannH.KlauerK. C. (2016b). The relevance effect and conditionals. Cognition, 150, 26–36.
45.
StahlC.KlauerK. C.ErdfelderE. (2008). Matching bias in the selection task is not eliminated by explicit negations. Thinking and Reasoning, 14(3), 281–303.
46.
TrabassoT.RollinsH.ShaughnessyE. (1971). Storage and verification stages in processing concepts. Cognitive Psychology, 2, 239–289.
47.
WallstenT. S.González-VallejoC. (1994). Statement verification: A stochastic model of judgment and response. Psychological Review, 101, 490–504.
48.
WasonP. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 12–40.
49.
WasonP. C. (1966). Reasoning. In FossB. (Ed.), New horizons in psychology (pp. 106–137). Penguin.
50.
WasonP. C. (1968). Reasoning about a rule. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 273–228.
51.
WasonP. C. (1969). Regression in reasoning. British Journal of Psychology, 60, 471–480.
52.
WasonP. C.GoldingE. (1974). The language of inconsistency. British Journal of Psychology, 65, 537–546.
53.
WasonP. C.GreenD. W. (1984). Reasoning and mental representation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 36(A), 597–610.
54.
WasonP. C.Johnson-LairdP. N. (1970). A conflict between selecting and evaluating information in an inferential task. British Journal of Psychology, 21, 14–20.
55.
WasonP. C.Johnson-LairdP. N. (1972). Psychology of reasoning: Structure and content. Harvard University Press.
