Abstract
Summary Test responses to a standardized reasoning test (the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Subtest 1) were examined. Ss read narrative material and evaluated proposed conclusions as true (T), probably true (PT), insufficient data (ID), probably false (PF), or false (F). Logically, different standards should be used for definite (T and F) and probabalistic (PT, ID, and PF) conclusions. However, Ss responses to probable items (e.g., PF) indicate that they treated the probable items as midpoints between insufficient data items (ID) and definite items (e.g., F). Study 1 was based on archival data, the test results of 82 male executives (mean age 36.5). Study 2 was based on an experiment examining test responses of 41 male and female university students (mean age 19.4) given different types of instructions. The second study was conducted to ensure the generality of Study 1 results.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
