中文摘要：

该研究探索了规则的信息量与明显度对规则可获得性的影响。采用改编后的2-4-6任务,70名大学生参加了两个实验。实验1发现,规则可获得性除了受到信息量的影响外,还受到明显度的显著影响;实验2增加了规则的探测,发现信息量大、明显度高的规则更容易用语言陈述出来,而信息量小、明显度低的规则更不容易陈述出来。实验结果启示：信息量大、明显度高的规则可能是一种外显规则,而信息量小、明显度低的规则可能是一种内隐规则。初步提出了＂计算和感知的双加工＂模型。

英文摘要：

This study focuses on the availability of rule learning. Cherubini, Castelvecchio ＆ Cherubini （2005）; Cherubini, Rusconi, Russo, Di Bari, ＆ Sacchi （2010） confirmed that the availability of rule learning was influenced by the information amount of the rule. Information amount was explained by how many examples could be covered by a rule. For a rule, the more number of examples could be converted, the less information amount would have. For example, in 2-4-6 task, the information amount in the rule of ＂even number increase＂ is 1/n and in the rule of ＂the third number is the sum of other two＂ is 1/n^2. The information amount theory suggests that a rule with higher information amount is generated more easily than a lower one. However, Some researches （Barsalou,1982; Rips,1989; Medin, Lynch, Coley, ＆ Atran,1997; Shafto, Coley, ＆ Baldwin,2007; Guhe, Pease, ＆ Smail,2011） showed that rule learning would be impacted by the information background of participants. In this paper, information background was defined as the obviousness of the rule. Inspired by dual process model of deductive reasoning （Evans, 2003, 2010; Sloman, 1996; Barrouillet, 2011）, This study assumed that the cognitive process of rule learning might be impacted by the information amount and obviousness both. Dual process model suggested that there were two independent cognitive systems, system 1 was usually described as unconscious and automatic; the system 2 was inherently conscious and controlled. This paper assumed that there might be two independent cognitive systems that manipulating rule learning process. This hypothesis was tested by experiment 1. Additionally, Ashby （1998） also suggested that there were two kinds of category learning. One was the rule-base category learning, the other was information integration. In the case of rule-based learning, participants could abstract a linguistic and explicit rule from materials, while they cannot discover an explicit rule but still can classify materials when doing