Reasoning strategy and ageism: a one-month test–retest study

The Dual-Strategy model of reasoning suggests that individuals tend to favour either a Counterexample strategy, which relies on mental model-based reasoning, or a Statistical strategy, which involves an intuitive probabilistic approach to assessing logical validity. This distinction predicts performance across a variety of judgement tasks above and beyond the effect of cognitive ability. This model assumes reasoning strategy is relatively stable while allowing flexibility. We examined this assumption in an online test-retest study over a one-month interval. Participants completed the Strategy Diagnostic Questionnaire, alongside measures of cognitive ability and ambivalent ageism against older adults at both time points. Results showed that strategy use was relatively stable while allowing predictable transitions. Reasoning strategy also predicted ageism scores one month later, over and above differences in age, education and cognitive covariates. These results indicate that the Dual-Strategy model highlights general and important individual differences in reasoning that could inform debiasing methods.