Reasoning instruction produced a larger improvement than reading comprehension instruction in the ocular metric of relational thinking on the transitive inference task¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The Group×Time interaction model was best supported by the relational thinking gaze data, while for the Comprehension group there was moderate evidence favoring the null model. → Belén C. Guerra-Carrillo and Silvia A. Bunge 2018 q3 i? There was moderate evidence against including the interaction term for the relational integration metric, so the group difference was specific to the broader relational thinking measure. → Belén C. Guerra-Carrillo and Silvia A. Bunge 2018 (2)

Evidence¶

Belén C. Guerra-Carrillo and Silvia A. Bunge 2018¶

Belén C. Guerra-Carrillo and Silvia A. Bunge. (2018). Eye gaze patterns reveal how reasoning skills improve with experience. npj Science of Learning 3:18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0035-8

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Bayesian mixed regressions on the relational thinking gaze metric (total fixation duration on relevant relations); the article reports the data are 3.66 times more likely under the Group×Time model than the main-effects model, with extreme evidence for improvement in the Reasoning group.

"the interaction model was best supported by the relational thinking data (BF 10 ≈ 7.27 ± 1.51%)"

Belén C. Guerra-Carrillo and Silvia A. Bunge 2018 (2)¶

Belén C. Guerra-Carrillo and Silvia A. Bunge. (2018). Eye gaze patterns reveal how reasoning skills improve with experience. npj Science of Learning 3:18. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-018-0035-8

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Bayesian mixed regression on the relational integration metric (saccades between the two relevant scales); the interaction was not supported, though the Reasoning group alone showed moderate evidence of improved integration.

"there was moderate evidence against including the interaction term to model the relational integration data (BF 10 ≈ 0.17 ± 2.32%)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Changes in visual search efficiency on the transitive inference task were attributable to test–retest effects rather than reasoning instruction — related
• A 6-week LSAT Logic Games course produced greater improvement on a composite of four visuospatial reasoning assessments than a Reading Comprehension course — related
• Across the full sample, individual differences in response-time reductions were best explained by a model combining relational thinking, relational integration, and visual search changes, with relational thinking the strongest single predictor — related
• Both LSAT course groups became faster at solving transitive inference problems between pre- and post-test, with the strongest model containing only an effect of Time — related