Computer-based logic proofs are a form of “unnatural” language in which the process and structure of proof generation can be observed in considerable detail. We have been studying how students respond to multimodal logic teaching, and performance measures have already indicated that students' pre-existing cognitive styles have a significant impact on teaching outcome. Furthermore, a large corpus of proofs has been gathered via automatic logging of proof development. This paper applies a series of techniques, including corpus statistical methods, to the proof logs. The results indicate that students' cognitive styles influence the structure of their logical discourse, via their differing methods of handling abstract information in diagrams, and transferring information between modalities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Barwise, J. and Etchemendy, J., 1994, Hyperproof, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Campagnoni, F.R. and Ehrlich, K., 1989, “Information retreival using a hypertext-based help system,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems 7, 271–291.
Cox, R., Stenning, K., and Oberlander, J., 1994, “Graphical effects in learning logic: Reasoning, representation and individual differences,” pp. 237–242 in Proceedings of the 16th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Atlanta, GA, August, A. Ram and K. Eisett, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
di Sessa, A.A., 1979, “On 'learnable' representations of knowledge: A meaning for the computational metaphor,” pp. 239–288 in Cognitive Process Instruction, J. Lochhead and J. Clement, eds., Philadelphia, PA: The Franklin Institute Press.
Dunning, T., 1993, “Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence,” Computational Linguistics 19, 61–74.
Duran, R., Powers, D., and Swinton, S., 1987, “Construct validity of the GRE analytical test: A resource document,” ETS Research Report 87-11, Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Harris, R.J., 1975, A Primer of Multivariate Statistics, London: Academic Press.
Mayer, R.E. and Sims, V.K., 1994, “For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning,” Journal of Educational Psychology 86, 389–401.
Monaghan, P., 1995, “A corpus-based analysis of individual differences in proof-style,” M.Sc. Thesis, Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh.
Oberlander, J., Cox, R., and Stenning, K., 1996, “Proof styles in multimodal reasoning,” pp. 403–414 in Language, Logic and Computation: Volume 1, J. Seligman and D. Westerståhl, eds., Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Oberlander, J., Cox, R., Mongahan, P., Stenning, K., and Tobin, R., 1996, “Individual differences in proof structures following multimodal logic teaching,” pp. 201–206 in Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, La Jolla, CA, July, G.W. Cottrell, ed., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schwarz, B. and Dreyfus, T., 1993, “Measuring integration of information in multirepresentational software,” Interactive Learning Environments 3, 177–198.
Snow, R.E., 1987, “Aptitude complexes,” pp. 1–9 in Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, Volume 3: Conative and Affective Process Analysis, R.E. Snow and M.J. Farr, eds., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stenning, K. and Oberlander, J., 1991, “Reasoning with words, pictures and calculi: Computation versus justification,” pp. 607–621 in Situation Theory and Its Applications, Volume 2, J. Barwise, J.M. Gawron, G. Plotkin, and S. Tutiya, eds., Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
Stenning, K. and Oberlander, J., 1995, “A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementation,” Cognitive Science 19, 97–140.
Stenning, K., Cox, R., and Oberlander, J., 1995, “Contrasting the cognitive effects of graphical and sentential logic teaching: Reasoning, representation and individual differences,” Language and Cognitive Processes 10, 333–354.
Wason, P.C., 1977, “Self-contradictions,” pp. 114–128 in Thinking: Readings in Cognitive Science, P.N. Johnson-Laird and P.C. Wason, eds., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
About this article
Cite this article
Oberlander, J., Monaghan, P., Cox, R. et al. Unnatural Language Processing. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 8, 363–384 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008388812468
- cognitive styles
- diagrammatic reasoning
- logic teaching