ABSTRACT
Most studies of multiple-cue judgment focus on learning by individuals. In a multiple-cue judgment task we examined if people acquire rule or exemplar knowledge as a function of learning the task alone or in dyads. The expectation was that learning in dyads should promote explicit rule-based thinking as a consequence of increased verbalization (a social abstraction effect) and produce a larger joint exemplar knowledge base (an exemplar pooling effect). The results suggest more accurate judgments by dyads, an exemplar pooling effect, but no evidence for a social abstraction effect. In contrast to previous research, the social interaction had beneficial effects that allowed participants working in dyads to surpass their combined individual performance.
