研究在探討以類比的方式學習證偽的法則測試邏輯。實驗中227 個大專學生被隨機分派至三種教導情境（證偽解題實例、解題實例+ 邏輯結構圖示、及控制組）。教導情境以四個練習題來操弄。法則測試作業的測試題含16 個有具體經驗內容的法則規定敘述及2 個抽象法則。
具體法則測試題中，一半的法則規定語意結構與練習題相同，另一半則不同。此外，具體法則測試題中，半數的法則中至少有一變項名稱與練習題相同( 表面相似)；另一半法則則否( 無表面相似度)。結果發現，當法則規定的測試題與練習題間為相同語意結構時，證偽之解題實例確可以顯著提高證偽該法則的測試行為，且當無表面相似性的干擾時，不論是否附有問題之邏輯結構圖示，證偽之先前實例均皆可以提高不同語意結構測試題的證偽次數。由此推論，邏輯結構之掌握與排除表面相似性是以類比進行科學思考的要件。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of analogical learning on the acquisition of falsification reasoning skill. Two hundred and twenty-seven college students were randomly assigned to three analogical learning situations (worked-out examples, worked-out examples + logical structure illustration, control) to work on four practice items with or without falsification worked-out examples. Their performance on 16 test items of deontic rule testing showed that worked-out examples could enhance the use of falsification reasoning only when test items shared the same semantic structure with the worked-out examples. When test items differed from the worked-out examples in the semantic structure, the success of analogical learning occurred only when there was no surface similarity between them. These findings suggest that in scientific reasoning a scientist’s challenge lies in extracting a problem’s underlying logic of rules and meanwhile excluding the misleading effect of surface similarity.