How to Use Deductive Reasoning

How to Use Deductive Reasoning
How to Use Deductive Reasoning | Source

What is Deductive Reasoning?

Understanding how deductive reasoning works can be most easily achieved by considering a classic example of this reasoning in action: the work of a criminal detective. When a detective does the work of solving a crime, she makes regular use of both inductive and deductive reasoning. While the actual process is far more integrated and complicated than what I will present here, considering these two forms of reasoning from this basic perspective will create a clear picture of how deductive reasoning works in a general sense.

Detectives and Deductive Reasoning
Detectives and Deductive Reasoning | Source

Understanding Inductive Reasoning

On first arriving at the scene of a crime the detective’s first priority, along with that of the rest of the police force, is to gather evidence. Everyone sets to work collecting, organizing and securing as many details as possible for later study. As the details come together the detective begins to use inductive reasoning to develop theories for how the crime may have taken place.

This is the basic structure of inductive reasoning: the process of analyzing facts and evidence in an attempt to articulate what they suggest might be true. Anytime you take a collection of details and examine them in an attempt to create generalizations or hypothesis about what they infer you are using inductive reasoning. The advantage of this approach comes in its ability to help you develop a list of possibilities for things that might be true given what you currently know. In just this way, the detective uses his evidence to develop competing theories for a given crime.

Deductive Reasoning:

…analyzing a proposition accepted as true in order to determine what else must also be true as a direct result

Understanding Deductive Reasoning

Once these theories are in place, the process of deductive reasoning begins. In deductive reasoning, you begin with a proposition that you accept as true. If that proposition is in fact true, then it will suggest many other things that must also be true.

Thus, when the detective begins to examine a particular theory for a crime using deductive reasoning, it provides her with a focused direction for further questions and gathering of evidence. As the process proceeds, if something is found that doesn’t fit, it disproves the original proposition, allowing the detective to rule that theory out and move on to others.

Eventually, as these two processes weave together, the detective eventually resolves the crime by using inductive reasoning to come up with the theories and using deductive reasoning to prove their validity.

Thus, inductive reasoning is about figuring out what might be true where deductive reasoning is about figuring out what must be true. This definition is a bit oversimplified, but it gets at the basic idea and provides a reasonable foundation for understanding the rest of this article.

Deductive Reasoning as a Testing Strategy

In January of 2012 I received the results of a comprehensive multiple-choice test on reading and writing skills for the students at the school where I teach. The first semester had gone well, I’d made some solid research-based changes to the way I was teaching and I was expecting good results.

The scores were dismal.

After several days of frustration, self-incrimination and general whining, I took a serious look at the results and searched for an explanation. Days of number crunching led me to one basic conclusion: my students were not showing what they know. While I wouldn’t expect their scores to be perfect, they should have been significantly higher.

In short order, I discovered that their central problem was not one of knowledge or skill base, but one of not understanding how to take a test. My students were failing to show what they know. After teaching this lesson on deductive reasoning, their scores literally doubled, finally reaching a level that I felt was a genuine reflection of what they actually knew and understood about reading and writing.

Here is the lesson:

Aaargh!  I Can't take the pressure!
Aaargh! I Can't take the pressure! | Source

How Not to Take a Test

The Worst Way to Take a Test

Short of wadding it up and throwing it away, the very worst way to take a test is to simply guess randomly. Statistics suggest that you can earn about a 25% on a test with this approach. In my experience, it’s much worse. Students who take this approach can’t seem to resist the temptation to use the answer bubbles to draw clever pictures of hippos, which, while quite creative, does not bode well for one’s test score.

The Next Worst Way to Take a Test

The next best approach is not much better. Many students I have will scan the given reading or problem, then run down the list of answers looking for the one that could be correct. Once they find one they mark it, rarely taking the time to even read the other answers, let alone deeply consider them.

Yet Another Bad Way to Take a Test

Most of the students, however, do not fall into either of these two categories. Instead, they take this approach. They begin by reading the questions. Then, if applicable, they will read the given text for the questions. They will then read the answers and decide which one is most likely to be true. Whichever answer they decide upon is the one they pick, and then they move on to the next question.

If you recall from our initial discussion above about deductive and inductive reasoning, this approach is largely inductive. That is, the student is looking at the details and thinking about what is most likely to be true. Also recall, however, that inductive reasoning is designed to help people discover what might be true, not what is actually true.

Thus, getting the wrong answer is pretty common, especially with more difficult questions in which there may be several “correct” answers, but one is actually more correct when examined closely. Quite simply, this is a very bad way to take a test.

Text Annotation Quick Reference

Symbol to Use
What to Use it For
?
Mark Questions or Confusing Parts
!
Mark Ideas that Strike You
Circled Word
Misspelled Word
Underline Key Words / Phrases
Important Ideas & Phrases
Write Out Connecting Words
Note Personal Connections

How to Take a Test

Step 1: Annotate the Text

Read the problem carefully, carefully read the problem and read the problem with great care. Am I repeating myself? Yes. I think I am, so let’s say it one more time: read the problem carefully!

If you intend to use deductive reasoning successfully as a testing strategy, you must begin by being very clear about what the problem is asking. If it’s a math problem, analyze it. If it’s a text to read, read it slowly and deeply. In both cases, annotate the text if at all possible (this means, write notes directly on the given problem or text).

To give you the idea of what this should look like, watch this short video in which I model the process:

Annotation Demonstration Video

Step 2: Use Inductive Reasoning to Survey the Answers

With a solid sense of the question now in place, read through the answers to determine which of them might be true and which are definitely false. If possible, put a slash mark through ones that are flat wrong and put a question mark beside ones that might be correct.

Notice that I did not say “are” correct. At this stage, you cannot know for certain which answer is actually correct, so it’s important to keep in mind that you are looking for possible answers not final answers.

I can do this!
I can do this! | Source

Step 3: Use Deductive Reasoning to Determine the Right Answer

Now that you have narrowed down the list of possible answers, it’s time to determine which of them is actually correct. Here is where deductive reasoning’s power to reveal what is actually true versus what may be true comes in very handy.

To use this approach correctly, you have to change the way you think about the answers. That is, instead of searching for the one you think is the most correct, you take each of the answers you have identified as possibilities and deal with them each individually.

So, if I think that “B” is a possible answer, then I begin my thinking with the assumption that “B” is, in fact, correct. With this in mind, I go back into the details of the question and its text to “prove” it. Essentially, I go searching for the evidence that makes this answer true. If I can find it, then it can stay. If I can’t find it, or something else in the evidence contradicts it, then it fails and I cross it out. Either way, I then move on to the next possible answer and follow the same procedure.

By taking this approach, you will know with certainty why the correct answer you chose is, in fact, correct. As an added bonus for those really tough questions, you will find that you are far better prepared to measure two good answers against one another and decide on the best option.

A Final Note

Let's be honest, taking a test this way takes a lot more time, which is something that most students really hate to give up. However, the truth of the matter is this: I guarantee that taking tests this way will improve your test scores because it allows you to actually use all that you know. And every reluctant student I basically force to take tests this way is smiling when they walk away with their score because it’s higher than what they’re used to.

School is hard work.

So is life.

Deal.

It will turn out much better that way!

How Deductive Reasoning can Reduce Test Anxiety

In my experience, test anxiety generally has one of two sources: lack of preparation or fear of the testing process itself. For those who suffer from the first problem, my suggestion is that you study. I wish I could offer a better solution, but there isn’t one. If you’re not ready for your tests, then get ready—period. As I said before, school is hard work, and so is life—deal.

For those who suffer from fear of the process itself, the advantage of deductive reasoning is that it takes much of the mystery and surprise out of testing by giving you a very specific process to follow for each question. Simply work through the process and you are guaranteed to get the chance to fully show what you know.

More by this Author


Comments 15 comments

Nare Anthony profile image

Nare Anthony 4 years ago

As always a great job!!! Everything is so carefully planned! I admire your work!


kelleyward 4 years ago

Another fantastic hub! I think deductive thinking often is more creative. What a great analysis on how to approach test taking! Voted up and Shared on Pinterest! Take care, Kelley


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 4 years ago from Colorado Author

Kellleyward,

Thanks so much for taking the time to read. I love how you have recognized the creativity involved with deductive reasoning--most people do not generally see it that way, and it does require original thinking to make it work successfully.

Thanks so much for the vote and the share!

wayseeker


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 4 years ago from Colorado Author

Nare,

Thanks for taking the time to read. Planning everything takes quite awhile, which has definitely slowed me down this month, but I feel it's important to creating something useful. I really appreciate your support!

wayseeker


BlissfulWriter profile image

BlissfulWriter 4 years ago

I think schools should emphasize more in terms of critical thinking skills, and teaching deductive and inductive reasoning. Those in the math and sciences kind of get it via their usual material. But those in the arts need this too.


Amy Gillie profile image

Amy Gillie 4 years ago from Indiana

Great job, wayseeker! This is very clear, and I love the images you used.


Blawger profile image

Blawger 4 years ago from California

Great explanation of deductive vs. inductive reasoning. Using deductive reasoning as a testing strategy is great advice that actually works. Totally saved me during the Texas Bar. Voted up!


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 4 years ago from Colorado Author

BlissfulWriter,

I fully agree. I try, as often as possible, to provide this where I can in my language arts classes. It definitely makes for better thinking all around. Thanks for taking the time to visit!

wayseeker


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 4 years ago from Colorado Author

Amy,

Thanks for reading, and I'm glad to hear that the info is clear. It's so easy to get it all jumbled up in your brain when you're writing it!

wayseeker


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 4 years ago from Colorado Author

Blawger,

I'm really glad to hear this! I've been using it to help middle school kids pass an English test, so it's great to hear first-hand that it's useful all the way up to the Texas Bar. It's really just about thinking through things thoroughly so you have every opportunity to use what you know to make the right choice.

Thanks so much for sharing this and taking the time to read.

wayseeker


OdysseusMakridis profile image

OdysseusMakridis 2 years ago from Netcong, NJ

You are not getting to the roots of the distinction between deductive and inductive reasoning and this can lead to confusion.

Although the proverbial detective is likely to use deductive reasoning in the theory-building phase, as you point out, she may also use inductive reasoning. What makes an argument inductive as opposed to deductive - that's the rub. The distinction does not originate from the stage of inquiry in which we find arguments used.


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 2 years ago from Colorado Author

OdysseusMakridis,

Your argument makes sense to me, but I'm not sure how to respond. I approach this from the perspective of a teacher, not a philosopher or scholar. If the distinction does not originate from the stage on inquiry, then where does the distinction come from?

Thanks for taking the time to respond!

Bert


OdysseusMakridis profile image

OdysseusMakridis 2 years ago from Netcong, NJ

Arguments come in two varieties, inductive and deductive, as we know: the distinction between the two types is not institutional (with one type used in one setting and the other in another kind of setting.)

Deductive arguments do not depend for their validity on empirical matters (information, factual evidence, ...) but on what logical form they have: any argument of the form, for instance, "p and q; not-p; therefore, q" is valid regardless of what is being talked about. Inductive arguments, on the other hand, have no characteristic forms or structures, like the one above, but they are analogies, generalizations, extrapolations. "N number of observed ducks have been white; therefore, the next duck we will see is likely to be white" - it can be a strong or weak argument depending on how high the number N is and other criteria. The conclusion of an inductive argument is more or less likely to be true if the premises are true. In a deductive argument,if the form is valid, truth of the premises guarantees absolutely the truth of the conclusions.

Deep down, let's say this all stems from how language works. It isn't a matter of who studies it - this is the phenomenon that is there to be studied when reasoning is tracked. Unfortunately, very few students take Logic in college. But this is what LSAT checks! Logic. Kaplan, Princetin Review, etc., thrive on teaching applied logic!

By the way, the stories about Sherlock Holmes use the verb "deduce" wrongly for the most part: his arguments are usually inductive, not deductive, when this claim is made about his actions.


wayseeker profile image

wayseeker 2 years ago from Colorado Author

Odysseus,

So, if I am reading this right, the kind of reasoning that I propose using in this article for taking tests is actually more inductive than it is deductive. Would you agree with this conclusion? I must admit that I never took logic, so my explanations here are likely based on a sort of "common" understanding, which may very well be inaccurate (I have found this to be true in other areas of scholarship with which I am more familiar). If this is the case, I will make a point to return to this and revise it when I have the time. I do not wish to perpetuate false perceptions and understandings.

Thanks for your thoughtful analysis,

Bert


OdysseusMakridis profile image

OdysseusMakridis 2 years ago from Netcong, NJ

Thank you too. I am used to a combative attitude when such matters come up. I teach college and I can tell you that academics are intolerant (defensively?) of attempts to elucidate such matters. Most Ph. D.s have never studied Logic! Exceptions: Math, of course, some sciences, and only Philosophy (which is my subject) and Linguistics.

In the meantime, fewer and fewer students take Logic - except for pre-Law students perhaps - and their academic advisors cannot guide them, either. Do you see a threat here? A small elite of properly educated people (Law school educated?) might continue to get the right education but what about the rest? Not being versed in Logic also entails that one is liable to be hoodwinked by unpersuasive arguments that come across, psychologically, as being persuasive.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working