ABSTRACT
Two studies are reported investigating the strategies that subjects use to revise hypotheses following disconfirmation. Subjects attempted to discover how genes are controlled by conducting experiments in a simulated molecular genetics laboratory. In Study 1, subjects set a goal of finding an experimental result, when this goal was not achieved they adopted one of the three following strategies. (1) Distort the logic of evidence interpretation to fit the current goal. (2) Conduct a parametric analysis of the Experiment space to achieve the goal. (3) Set a new experimental goal of trying to discover the cause of unexpected findings. Only the third group discovered how the genes are controlled. In Study 2, the hypothesis that the subject's experimental goal blocks consideration of alternative hypotheses was investigated. When subjects were allowed to reach their initial goal, they then set a new goal of accounting for unusual findings and discovered the mechanism of control. These results suggest that the goal of the subjects constrains search of both an Hypothesis and an Experiment space. This strategy can produce distortions in reasoning and a failure to generate new hypotheses.
