Biomedical subjects

PR Laughlin

Publications and source records attributed to PR Laughlin.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1999

Effectiveness of Positive Hypothesis Testing in Inductive and Deductive Rule Learning.

In a positive hypothesis test a person generates or examines evidence that is expected to have the property of interest if the hypothesis is correct, whereas in a negative hypothesis test a person generates or examines evidence that is not expected to have the property of interest if the hypothesis is correct. Two experiments assessed the effectiveness of positive versus negative hypothesis tests on inductive and deductive rule learning problems. In Experiment 1 problem solvers induced a rule by proposing hypotheses and selecting evidence in the eight conditions of a factorial design defined by instructions to use a positive or negative hypothesis test on each of trials 1-5, 6-10, and 11-15. Instructions to use positive tests resulted in more examples, fewer strategic hypotheses, and a higher weighted score for five types of hypotheses than instructions to use negative tests. In Experiment 2 problem solvers identified 1 of a possible 1296 correct rules in the deductive rule learning game Mastermind. When problems were classified in the 16 possible combinations of positive or negative hypothesis tests on trials 2, 3, 4, and 5 there were fewer trials to solution for positive tests on each of the four trials and fewer trials to solution with increasing positive tests. We conclude that positive hypothesis tests are generally more effective than negative hypothesis tests in both inductive and deductive rule learning. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1999

Frames of Reference in Quantity Estimations by Groups and Individuals.

The superiority of group performance over performance of the average individual is relatively greater on world knowledge tasks than on quantity estimation tasks. Previous research on quantity estimations has involved judgments without an explicit frame of reference. We propose that a frame of reference converts a quantity estimation into a world knowledge inference by embedding the estimation in a larger cognitive structure. Individuals first estimated 30 pairs of quantities, such as the length of the Ohio River and the length of the Arkansas River, given either 2 statements as a frame of reference (the Mississippi River is 2340 miles long; the Colorado River is 1450 miles long), 1 of these statements as a frame of reference, or no frame of reference. Then they made the same 30 pairs of estimations again as 3-person groups or as individuals under the same frame-of-reference conditions. As predicted, group estimations were more accurate than individual estimations, both group and individual estimations were more accurate with either a 2-statement or a 1-statement frame of reference than without a frame of reference, and the frame of reference improved group estimations relatively more than individual estimations. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1999

Collective Induction: Twelve Postulates.

Collective induction is the cooperative search for descriptive, predictive, and explanatory generalizations, rules, and principles. This article presents 12 postulates on collective induction and supportive evidence for the postulates. Postulates 1-6 set collective induction within the general social combination approach to cooperative group decision making. Postulates 7 and 8 formalize the social combination processes of group hypothesis formation in collective induction. Postulates 9-12 summarize research on collective versus individual induction, the relative importance of multiple hypotheses and multiple evidence, influence in simultaneous collective and individual induction, and the relative effectiveness of positive and negative hypothesis tests. We then consider the history and fundamental emphasis of the social combination approach to small group performance. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

PubMed1998

Effectiveness of Positive Hypothesis Testing for Cooperative Groups.

In a rule induction problem positive hypothesis tests select evidence that the tester expects to be an example of the correct rule if the hypothesis is correct, whereas negative hypothesis tests select evidence that the tester expects to be a nonexample if the hypothesis is correct. We extend previous analyses of the effectiveness of positive and negative tests for ambiguous verification or conclusive falsification of hypotheses by emphasizing the importance of examples following positive or negative tests. Cooperative four-person groups solved rule induction problems from a single known example of the correct rule by proposing hypotheses and selecting evidence on each of four arrays on a series of trials. There were more examples following positive tests than negative tests. The transition probability from an incorrect hypothesis on trial t to the correct hypothesis on trial t + 1 was higher for positive tests than for negative tests, higher for positive tests followed by examples than positive tests followed by nonexamples, and higher for negative tests followed by examples than negative tests followed by nonexamples. Once the group proposed the correct hypothesis on trial t they were highly likely to continue to propose the correct hypothesis on trial t + 1. Copyright 1998 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗