Reasoning strategy modulates gender differences in performance on a spatial rotation task.

Abstract

The dual-strategy model of reasoning has proposed that individual differences in reasoning can be understood as due to two general ways of processing information: an analytic, counterexample strategy that examines information for explicit potential counterexamples and an intuitive, statistical strategy that uses associative access to generate a likelihood estimate of putative conclusions. Previous studies have examined this model in the context of basic conditional reasoning tasks. However, the distinctions that underlie the dual-strategy model can be seen as a basic description of more general differences in information processing. A recent study examining interactions between gender and strategy use in processing of negative emotions found that gender differences were modulated by strategy, with the general advantage of females concentrated within statistical reasoners. Two studies were performed to extend this analysis to performance on a mental rotation task for which there also exist clear gender differences. The initial study presented rotation tasks with unlimited time. Results show that males perform better on more difficult rotation tasks than females, with the difference concentrated among statistical reasoners. The second study replicated this using a restricted time (4 s) to make each judgement and showed an increase in the effect of both gender and strategy. This provides additional evidence that the dual-strategy model captures an important individual difference in the general way that information is processed.