A dual-process account of the development of scientific reasoning: The nature and development of metacognitive intercession skills

The case for a dual-process theory of transitive reasoning

“…However, our exact estimate has been repeatedly found for 17 to 19 year-olds using alternative transitive designs within the nontraining paradigm (e.g., Goodwin & Johnson-Laird, 2006;Viskontas et al, 2005). The 17 to 19 age estimate has also been reported (and/or intimated) from studies of other domains of reasoning (Amsel et al, 2008;De Neys & Vanderputte, 2011;Reyna & Farley, 2006).…”

“…These above findings mirror findings with more formal tasks of deduction given to children of similar ages, such as the Wason selection task and other conditional tasks (Amsel et al, 2008;Chapell & Overton, 2002;Markovits & Thompson, 2008). For example, Markovits et al (1996) investigated conditional reasoning in 7 to 12 year-olds.…”

“…However, Amsel et al (2008) have been more explicit on the nature of the third process: "In dual-process theory, metacognitive skills function to regulate conflicts between analytically and experientially based responses." (Amsel et al, 2008, pp.455).…”

“…Or even one for conscious/wilful inferences and the other for unconscious/automatic inferences (Martin & Alsop, 2004). The claim is not that one of these routes ever obviates the other, but that they are both continually activated (e.g., in parallel), but with the analytic route guiding decisions if it has produced output (Amsel et al, 2008). Evans (2003) summarises evidence that indicates the analytic system (system-2) tends to lead to much slower decisions than the intuitive system (system-1) and is more taxing on linguistic and WM processes (see also De Neys & Glumicic, 2008).…”

The Emergence of Scientific Reasoning

“…Sodian and Bullock (2008) also argue that mature scientific reasoning involves the metastrategic process of being able to think explicitly about hypotheses and evidence, and that this skill is not fully mastered until adolescence at the very earliest. According to Amsel et al (2008), metacognitive competence is important for hypothetical reasoning. These conclusions are consistent with Kuhn's (1989Kuhn's ( , 2005Kuhn's ( , 2011a argument that the defining feature of scientific thinking is the set of cognitive and metacognitive skills involved in differentiating and coordinating theory and evidence.…”