Stephen E. Newstead

Undergraduate cheating: Who does what and why?

ABSTRACT Research on undergraduate cheating behaviour is in its infancy in the UK. The paper reports data from a series of studies across different academic disciplines and different institutions. The first study was designed to assess staff and student perceptions of the seriousness and frequency of different kinds of cheating. This enabled a comprehensive set of cheating behaviours to be developed. A second study utilised this set to elicit self-reports by undergraduates, who also gave reasons for indulging (or not) in each type of behaviour. Behaviours such as: copying each others work, plagiarism, and altering and inventing research data were admitted to by more than 60% of the students. Data with respect to age, gender, discipline and institution are discussed along with the implications of these results for all in higher education.

Lexical and grammatical processing of unshadowed messages: A re-examination of the Mackay effect

Mackay (1973) claimed to have provided evidence that subjects could process the grammatical structure and lexical content of nonshadowed messages. In the present study, it was found impossible to repeat Mackays findings when controls for several factors that had been ignored in Mackays study were employed. Subsequent experiments indicated that two major factors contributing to Mackays results were that he had a gap between sentences in his experiment and that the nonshadowed material came out of a background of silence. Both of these probably enabled subjects to switch attention to the nonshadowed material without disruption of shadowing performance.

Degree Performance as a Function of Age, Gender, Prior Qualifications and Discipline Studied.

Abstract The computerised records of a large university were analysed in an attempt to determine which variables served as predictors of degree performance. Age was a powerful predictor: mature students gained better degrees on average than younger students; and mature students with non‐traditional qualifications obtained the best degrees of all. Gender, year of graduation, and type of qualification were weak predictors of performance, but degree classifications were found to differ significantly across disciplines. The results are broadly consistent with previous studies, and suggest that opening access to mature students and to those with non‐traditional qualifications has not led to any diminution of standards. However, variations between disciplines and, in national statistics, between different years, suggest that steps may need to be taken to standardise degree classifications.

The source of belief bias effects in syllogistic reasoning

In studies of the belief bias effect in syllogistic reasoning, an interaction between logical validity and the believability of the conclusion has been found; in essence, logic has a larger effect on unbelievable than on believable conclusions. Two main explanations have been proposed for this finding. The selective scrutiny account claims that people focus on the conclusion and only engage in logical processing if this is found to be unbelievable; while the misinterpreted necessity account claims that subjects misunderstand what is meant by logical necessity and respond on the basis of believability when indeterminate syllogisms are presented. Experiments 1 and 2 compared the predictions of these two theories by examining whether the interaction would disappear if only determinate syllogisms were used. It did, thus providing strong support for the misinterpreted necessity explanation. However, the results are also consistent with a version of the mental models theory, and so Experiment 3 was carried out to compare these two explanations. The mental models theory received strong support, as it did also in the follow-up Experiments 4 and 5. It is concluded that people try to construct a mental model of the premises but, if there is a believable conclusion consistent with the first model they produce, then they fail to construct alternative models.

Individual differences in deductive reasoning

Three studies are reported, which examined individual differences in deductive reasoning as a function of intellectual ability and thinking style. Intellectual ability was a good predictor of logical performance on syllogisms, especially where there was a conflict between logic and believability. However, in the first two experiments there was no link between ability and performance on indicative selection tasks, in sharp contrast to previous research. This correlation did, however, return in the final study. Our data are consistent with the claim that the correlation with logical accuracy on abstract selection tasks is found primarily with participants of relatively high ability. At lower levels, pragmatically cued responses are given but those of slightly higher ability divorce the rule from the scenario and respond consistently (though incorrectly) across problems. Self-report questionnaires were generally poor predictors of performance, but a measure of the ability to generate alternative representations proved an excellent predictor. These results are consistent with a mental models approach to reasoning and also have implications for the debate about human rationality.

Debiasing by instruction: The case of belief bias

Abstract The study is concerned with the question of whether robust biases in reasoning can be reduced or eliminated by verbal instruction in principles of reasoning. Three experiments are reported in which the effect of instructions upon the belief bias effect in syllogistic reasoning is investigated. Belief bias is most clearly marked by a tendency for subjects to accept invalid conclusions which are a priori believable. Experiment 1 attempted to replicate and extend an experiment reported by Newstead, Pollard, Evans and Allen (1992). In contrast with their experiment, it was found that belief bias was maintained despite the use of augmented instructions which emphasised the principle of logical necessity. Experiment 2 provided an exact replication of the augmented instructions condition of Newstead et al., including the presence of problems with belief-neutral conclusions. Once again, significant effects of conclusion believability were found. A third experiment examined the use of elaborated instructi...

Conditional Reasoning with Realistic Material

Four experiments are reported which investigated the types of truth tables that people associate with conditional sentences and the kinds of inferences that they will draw from them. The present studies differed from most previous ones in using different types of content in the conditionals, for example promises and warnings. It was found that the type of content had a strong and consistent effect on both truth tables and inferences. It is suggested that this is because in real life conditionals make probabilistic assertions, and that the strength of the probabilistic link is determined by the situation in which the conditional occurs. The implications of these findings for current theories of reasoning are considered and it is concluded that none of them is entirely satisfactory. It is suggested that more linguistically based theories may prove more successful.

Proof-reading on VDUs

Abstract Two experiments are reported which compared proof-reading performance across three different modes of presentation. The results of Experiment 1 indicated that proof-reading accuracy was significantly worse on a VDU than on paper, with a photograph of the VDU display producing intermediate performance. It was also demonstrated that substitutions of visually similar errors were harder to detect than other error types. The results of Experiment 2 replicated these findings, but failed to find any difference between twin-column and single-column presentation. The findings are interpreted as indicating that character font may be a major factor in the poor performance with the VDU. It is suggested that the present experimental paradigm could be a useful assessment tool for the evaluation of display design.

Falsifying mental models: Testing the predictions of theories of syllogistic reasoning

Four experiments are reported that tested the claim, drawn from mental models theory, that reasoners attempt to construct alternative representations of problems that might falsify preliminary conclusions they have drawn. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to indicate which alternative conclusion( s) they had considered in a syllogistic reasoning task. In Experiments 2–4, participants were asked to draw diagrams consistent with the premises, on the assumption that these diagrams would provide insights into the mental representation being used. In none of the experiments was there any evidence that people constructed more models for multiple-model than for single-model syllogisms, nor was there any correlation between number of models constructed and overall accuracy. The results are interpreted as showing that falsification of the kind proposed by mental models theory may not routinely occur in reasoning.

The role of imagery in the representation of linear orderings

Two experiments were carried out to investigate whether visual imagery was used in representing transitive linear ordering relationships. Subjects were presented with passages describing either a linear ordering or a set inclusion relationship, while being subjected to either visual or verbal interference. Performance was tested by asking subjects to judge the truth or falsity of statements concerning both the information presented in the passages and inferences that could be drawn from this information. In neither experiment was there any evidence for the linear ordering material being selectively disrupted by the visual interference task, as would have been predicted by the imagery theory. Thus it is concluded that linear orderings are probably not represented as visual images.