【作者】 欧阳威； 胡笑羽； 胡竹菁； 艾炎； 沈友田； 张盼盼；

【Author】 Ouyang Wei;Hu Xiaoyu;Hu Zhujing;Ai Yan;Shen Youtian;Zhang panpan;School of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University;

【机构】 江西师范大学心理学院；

【摘要】 信念偏差效应是推理研究中的热点之一。信念偏差效应指人们在进行推论时更倾向于依靠结论的可信度而不是命题间的蕴含关系。各理论模型对信念偏差效应产生的原因及其认知加工过程有不同的解释。其中著名的双重加工理论认为,出现偏差效应是人们基于两种性质相异的认知系统完成推理加工造成。在此假设下,针对双系统协作与转换的认知过程的预测,出现了三类不同模型,即默认-干扰模型、平行模型、混合模型。另外我国学者提出的推理题与推理者知识双重结构模型理论强调,推理过程是主体推理知识对推理题客观存在的反应,所谓的信念偏差只是推理者对选用判定标准犹豫造成,其加工过程随推理中主客观关系变化而不同。为了对这两种理论下四种模型的预测力进行比较,本研究将通过3*2被试内设计,考察时间压力下被试依据不同认知要求完成不同冲突性质推理题的行为表现。结合相关理论描述,做出如下实验假设:如按双重加工理论相关模型所认为,被试迫于时间限制将依靠认知系统I所产生的答案进行推理判定,那么明确认知要求难以改变其认知结果;如为推理题与推理者知识双重结构模型所强调,被试将依据推理条件的改变而变化,那么随着推理判定标准间的冲突减少推理行为结果显著提升。结果发现:1.在不提示任何认知要求时,出现了显著的信念偏差效应;2.相较于不提示任何认知要求下的推理表现,明确认知要求后,被试的行为表现显著提升;3.当提供的认知要求不同,内容和形式加工产生了不同的运作关系。基于以上结果,得出结论,相较于推理题与推理者知识双重结构模型,双重加工理论下的三种模型所预测的双系统加工过程都难以解释在时间压力下随着明确认知要求后造成的推理认知水平提高的推理现象,并且实验中出现推理加工过程随着主客观耦合关系的差异而不同,故本研究支持推理题与推理者知识双重结构模型。更多还原

【Abstract】 The belief bias effect are one of the hotspots in the research of reasoning. Belief bias effect is a tendency that people to jugdeing conclusion of reasoning rely on the belief about conclusion rather than logical relationship between propositions. Different theoretical models have diverse explanations on the causes of belief bias and the process of cognitive processing.The famous the Dual-process Theory holds that the effect of belief bias are caused by people reasoning based on two cognitive systems that different nature. Under this assumption, there are three different models for the prediction of cognitive processes about relationship of cooperation and transformation between two systems, which Defalut-interventionist model, Paralle models and Hdbrid model. moreover, the Dual Structure Model of Item and Reasoner Reasoning Knowledge put forward by Chinese scholars emphasizes, reasoning process are reasoner`s knowledge responding to the reasoning problems, the reasoner hesitantly to use reasoning judge criteria of content or of form lead to the so-called belief bias effect, and the processing process will vary with the subjective and objective coupling relationship. In order to compare the predictive power of these models, the present study will via 3*2 within-subjects design, examine the behavioral performance that according to different cognitive requirements to solve reasoning judgement with different conflicting nature under timepressure through. According as theoretical description, experimental assumptions as follow: if according to the relevant model of the Dual-process Theory, \ subjects will judgement by the answers produced by the cognitive system I in time constraint, then it is difficult to change the cognitive result by defining the cognitive requirements; if as emphasized by the Dual Structure Model of Item and Reasoner`s Reasoning Knowledge, the participants will change processing with vary reasoning conditions, then with the unconflict between reasoning criteria, the result of reasoning behavior are significantly improved. The results show that: 1. there is a significant belief bias effect when no cognitive requirement is indicated; 2. bias tendency and the latency of processing reduced significantly with the reasoing criteria clarity; 3. the processing of content and form produces different operational relationships, because of the different reasoning requirement. Therefore, compared to the Dual Structure Model of Item and Reasoner`s Reasoning Knowledge, relevant models of the Dual-process Theory are difficult to explain the reasoning phenomenon that improvement In the ability of reasoning judgement with certain cognitive requirements under time pressure. In addition, the reasoning process in the experiment are different with the coupling relationship between subjective and objective. Therefore, this study supports the Dual Structure Model of Item and Reasoner`s Reasoning Knowledge.更多还原