ABSTRACT
We propose a conceptual framework for explaining logical reasoning in terms of competing strategies. The Logical Strategy Model (LSM; Morris & Schunn, in press), describes a series of strategies that differ in their functionality. Algorithmic strategies (e.g., token- based, verbal) are more costly (i.e., longer processing time) but more accurate, while heuristic strategies (e.g., analogies, matching rules, knowledge-based rules) are less costly but less accurate. The LSM was tested with 45 undergraduates, 23 graduate students, and 15 children ages 8–11. Each subject was given 24 deductive problems and asked to reflect on how they solved a problem by selecting one of five descriptions of a strategy.
