Abstract
Investigated the conditions that facilitate judgment of an argument's validity. 120 high- and low-dogmatic Ss were matched by group for reasoning ability and randomized to positive- and negative-source conditions. Each S judged the logical validity of 16 syllogisms which were counterbalanced on the basis of a pretest. 2 hypotheses were tested: (a) when syllogisms are attributed to positive and negative sources, low dogmatics will make a significantly greater number of accurate judgments of validity than will high dogmatics; and (b) high dogmatics will make more accurate judgments of validity under conditions of positive sources and valid syllogisms and under conditions of negative sources and invalid syllogisms. Conversely, low dogmatics will be more accurate under conditions of positive sources and invalid syllogisms and under conditions of negative sources and valid syllogisms. A 4-factor analysis of variance supported both hypotheses. Results are discussed as consistent with M. Rokeach's dogmatism theory, and the effect of certain syllogistic forms on the judgmental ability of high- and low-dogmatic Ss is considered. (20 ref.)
