ABSTRACT
In this paper we present a pragmatic analysis of a widely used task in the field of hypothesis testing: the 2-4-6 problem (Wason, 1960). In this task participants have to discover the rule “three increasing numbers” by testing triples of numbers and are given the “2-4-6” as an example of triples compatible with the rule. We argue that most people fail because the givens of the task are conversationally misleading: first because the 2-4-6 is communicated and is thus presumed to be relevant (Sperber & Wilson, 1995) and second because the rule to be discovered is too simple in the context of the task. In a first experiment we showed that providing the triple without communicating it improved performance in the task. In a second experiment we contextually increased the relevance of the rule and observed that people were thus more inclined to discover it.
