In an application of cognitive science research to psychology ethics training, this study investigated the ability of psychology students with 2 levels of experience (professional ethics course; no professional ethics course) to perceive ethical issues in ambiguous scenarios in which psychology ethics issues were not identified to participants as the focus of interest. A triad judgment task, used in studies of cognitive problem representation of learners in other domains (e.g., mathematics and education), had participants choose which of 2 scenarios "goes best" with a target scenario. Three types of triads were presented: (a) a scenario with similar surface features (in stoiy narrative) versus unrelated features, (b) scenarios with similar deep structural features (in underlying ethical issue) versus unrelated features, and (c) scenarios with similar surface versus similar structural features. Results showed that when there was competition between surface and structural features, more experienced students were better able to perceive the underlying professional ethical issues. However, all students (with or without psychology ethics training) were able to perceive the professional ethical issues when distracting features were removed. Results are interpreted in reference to a competence-performance distinction found in other domains, which suggests that automatic schema activation for less experienced learners may account for their being distracted by surface features of a problem and not by the inability to perceive important underlying features, that is, psychology ethical issues. Implications are discussed for how these findings about the cognitive processes inherent in ethical decision making in professional counseling and psychology might be used to inform and improve ethics training.