ABSTRACT
In general, the predominantly high correlations of task difficulty between different interpretations of the formulas buttresses the proposition that the subjects processed the tasks abstractly. However, the best evidence comes from the intertask consistency of each subject individually. The small differences found in the extent of consistency between more and less successful subjects are probably best explained as due to lapses in attention for various reasons in less successful subjects. The more and less successful subjects seem to operate about equally abstractly with the problems. Given the results of the consistency analysis, it might be expected that subjects who have more success on the tasks are more attuned to the abstract logical form of the problems, rather than to their topics and linguistic formulations. The children, and in fact many adults administered the problems who have no training in logic, can only report that they "think about" the problem or repeat the premisses.
