Ormrod J E
Am J Psychol. 1979 Jun;92(2):235-55.
This study investigated the nature of strategies used in solving the three-term series problem. Three presentation modes (auditory, visual/sequential, and visual/simultaneous) were crossed with two question positions (before-premises and after-premises), for a total of six methods of problem presentation. Both high-spatial/imagal and low-spatial/imagal problems were employed, the assumption being that better performance on high-spatial/imagal problems reflected the use of a spatial/imagal strategy, while equal performance on both types of problems indicated the use of an alternative, perhaps verbal, strategy. It was hypothesized that different presentations would lead to differences in memory demands, input/processing interference, and mathemagenic behaviors, and thus to different problem-solving strategies. Response data and subjective reports confirmed this prediction. Results were discussed in terms of the Clark-Huttenlocher controversy (H. H. Clark, Linguistic processes in deductive reasoning, in Psychological Review, 1969, 76, 387--404; J. Huttenlocher, Constructing spatial images: A strategy in reasoning, Psychological Review, 1968, 75, 550--560).
本研究调查了解决三项系列问题时所使用策略的本质。三种呈现模式（听觉、视觉/顺序、视觉/同时）与两个问题位置（前提之前和前提之后）交叉，共有六种问题呈现方法。同时使用了高空间/意象问题和低空间/意象问题，假设在高空间/意象问题上表现更好反映了使用空间/意象策略，而在两种类型问题上表现相同则表明使用了另一种策略，可能是语言策略。研究假设不同的呈现方式会导致记忆需求、输入/处理干扰和产生性思维行为的差异，从而导致不同的问题解决策略。反应数据和主观报告证实了这一预测。研究结果依据克拉克-赫滕洛彻之争（H. H. 克拉克，《演绎推理中的语言过程》，载于《心理学评论》，1969年，第76卷，第387 - 404页；J. 赫滕洛彻，《构建空间意象：推理中的一种策略》，《心理学评论》，1968年，第75卷，第550 - 560页）进行了讨论。
