Abstract One hundred forty-four 10th-grade students received training on one of three processing methods: coding-mapping (simultaneous), coding only, or decision tree (sequential). Then they learned a biconditional rule under one of eight transfer test conditions based on a 2 (paradigm: rule vs complete learning) × 2 (memory aids: 0 vs 4) × 2 (focus instance: presence vs absence) design. Although the coding-mapping students processed concept instances in much the same way as the coding-only students, they acquired the target rule more frequently, and they processed instances more quickly and more consistently than the decision-tree students. The observed ordinality of the responses of four truth-table classes was found to be more consistent with the simultaneity than with the sequentiality hypothesis. As expected, training interacted with paradigm and also with memory aids and focus instance. The induced simultaneous processing strategy apparently works optimally under rule learning, while the sequential strategy is difficult to induce and/or not optimal for rule-learning operations.