Experiment
1: LEGUP vs
Fitch
Method
Undergraduate
student Matthew Morrow created a bare-bones version of LEGUP, that
only worked for Light-Up puzzles. He ran a small experiment as
follows: Subjects, who were made sure to have had no formal training
in logic, would come to the lab, and take a pre-test of logic
problems of the Knight-Knave type (e.g. A very special island is
inhabited only by knights and knaves. Knights always tell the truth,
and knaves always lie.You meet two inhabitants:
Zoey and Mel. Zoey tells you that Mel is a knave. Mel says, `Neither
Zoey nor I are knaves.'Can you determine who is
a knight and who is a knave?) Half of the subjects would then be
shown an instructional video of either the traditional system of
propositional logic, followed by a video on the use of the Fitch
interface. They were then given some time to solve some propositional
logic problems using the Fitch interface. The other half was shown a
video on the Light-Up puzzle, followed by a video on the use of the
LEGUP interface, and were then given some time to solve some Light-Up
puzzles using the LEGUP interface. Finally, both types of subjects
were given a post-test of Knight and Knaves logic puzzles.
Results

The six pairs of
bars on the left are from subjects that received logical reasoning
instruction using Fitch. The six pairs on the right used LEGUP. The
blue bars represent performance on the pre-test of logical reasoning,
the red bars performance on the post-test. On average, the Fitch
users were able to get almost 2 more correct answers on the logic
problems, while the LEGUP users on average increased their
performance with over 8 more correct answers. (Morrow,
2009).

In terms of accuracy, the LEGUP subjects increased
the percentage of correct answers by 16.7%, while the Fitch
users improved their percentage of corret answers by 5.8%.
Discussion
While the
subject pool is obviously very small, the results do suggest some
advantage of the LEGUP system over the Fitch system. That is, both
groups increased their logical reasoning performance, but the LEGUP
users did more so than the Fitch users. What is interesting to note,
is that Knights and Knaves puzzles can be represented in
propositional format and, given enough time, can be solved using
Fitch. Obviously, this is not true of the LEGUP interface as
provided, which could only be used to solve Light-Up puzzles! Then
again, maybe their very limited exposure to propositional logic and
their attempts to solve the problems using the Fitch system - though
they did not have access to the interface, just paper and pencil - is
exactly what made the Fitch subject group do worse! Clearly, more
research is needed here.
References
Morrow, M. Logical Learning: Modern Formal Logic Teaching
Tools vs. Logic Puzzle Learning, Psychology Undergraduate
Thesis, RPI, 2009