Author
Listed:
- Schroeders, Ulrich
- Walter, Jonas
Abstract
Matrix reasoning tasks are widely used measures of fluid reasoning. Despite variation in construction principles, four difficulty components recur across tests: the number of elements, the number of rules, rule type, and perceptual organization. Among these, rule type is particularly central and can be formally classified into unary, binary, and ternary operations. Accordingly, we introduce BOLT (Boolean Operations to assess Logical Thinking), a matrix test grounded in Boolean algebra as the formal framework for item generation. Across two online pilot studies (Study 1: N= 473, 45 items; Study 2: N= 430, 42 items) and one operational administration (Study 3: N= 7150, 39 items), we estimated Rasch item difficulties and examined feature-based explanations of these estimates. Study 1 confirmed that the number of binary rules was the primary driver of difficulty, whereas unary and ternary rules showed no consistent effects. For Studies 2–3, we combined cross-validated LASSO feature selection with linear logistic test models (LLTMs) including random item effects to quantify contributions of structural features (number of elements, number of rules, rule types) and perceptual-organizational indices extracted from stimulus files. Item difficulty could be predicted with sufficient accuracy (LLTM R2=.74 in Study 2; R2=.55 in Study 3). Binary operations and perceptual organization emerged as converging determinants of item difficulty in BOLT items. Future work should replicate the finding that image-derived computer-vision indices make an incremental contribution beyond rule-based predictors and connect them to underlying processes of visual organization and rule induction
Suggested Citation
Schroeders, Ulrich & Walter, Jonas, 2026.
"Developing BOLT — A matrix test using Boolean operations to assess logical thinking,"
Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:intell:v:117:y:2026:i:c:s0160289626000255
DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2026.102026
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:117:y:2026:i:c:s0160289626000255. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.