No abstract

28 elementary school students were assessed for intelligence, then blindfolded and asked to explore objects manually before rendering judgments about how weight and width were related to length. Exploration time for each object was hypothesized to reflect the level of processing engaged in by the participants. It was also predicted that more intelligent children would produce the most accurate judgments. Inconsistent with the predictions, analysis indicated that children of higher intelligence did not produce the most accurate judgments. However, longer exploration times reflected a tendency to refrain from endorsing a negative correlation between length and width. Depth of processing is, therefore, presumed to aid in reasoning about covariation.

No abstract

28 elementary school students were assessed for intelligence, then blindfolded and asked to explore objects manually before rendering judgments about how weight and width were related to length. Exploration time for each object was hypothesized to reflect the level of processing engaged in by the participants. It was also predicted that more intelligent children would produce the most accurate judgments. Inconsistent with the predictions, analysis indicated that children of higher intelligence did not produce the most accurate judgments. However, longer exploration times reflected a tendency to refrain from endorsing a negative correlation between length and width. Depth of processing is, therefore, presumed to aid in reasoning about covariation.