The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Verbal and spatial strategies in reasoning
Abstract
A considerable body of research has attempted to determine the nature of reasoning processes. Two major and opposing schools of thought have emerged. Rule-based theories (e.g., Braine & O’Brien, 1998; Rips, 1994) suggest that individuals possess an inherent mental logic. Reasoning involves transducing premises into an abstract logical form (based on the syntactic structure of a given problem) and applying formal deduction rules to generate a new proposition. This is then converted into a conclusion appropriate for the task. As such, errors can be accounted for by the number and complexity of rules required.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Bacon, A. M., Handley, S. J., & Newstead, S. E. (2003). Individual differences in strategies for syllogistic reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning, 9, 133–168. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Inner Speech: Development, Cognitive Functions, Phenomenology, and Neurobiology
Alderson-Day, B., & Fernyhough, C. (2015) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000021 · Cited by 864
Metadata
- Authors
- Bacon, A. M., Handley, S. J., & Newstead, S. E.
- Venue
- Methods of Thought
- Publisher
- Psychology Press
- Published
- 2004-06-02
- Pages
- 88-112
- OpenAlex
- W4251704773
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.57
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
- Keywords
- reasoning, mental logic, speech strategies, spatial strategies, deductive reasoning, formal deduction, reasoning errors, problem representation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Verbal and spatial strategies in reasoning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9780203503881-10
- The paper
- Bacon, A. M., Handley, S. J., & Newstead, S. E. (2004). Verbal and spatial strategies in reasoning. Methods of Thought. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203503881-10
