Interesting. Many people suck at formal logic, but get much better when the problem is framed in terms of cheating.
Another way of saying this is that they turn over the “benefit received” card to make sure the cost was paid. And they turn over the “cost not paid” card to make sure no benefit was received. They look for cheaters.
The difference is startling. Subjects don’t need formal logic training. They don’t need math or philosophy. When asked to explain their reasoning, they say things like the answer “popped out at them.”
There’s also this:
People are just bad at the Wason selection task. They also tend to only take college logic classes upon requirement.
I took logic in college because it was a way of getting one of my humanities credits (taught by the philosophy department) with a class that was a lot like math.