【摘要】：通過(guò)對(duì)經(jīng)典四卡問(wèn)題呈現(xiàn)方式的改進(jìn),逐一呈現(xiàn)與命題對(duì)應(yīng)的檢驗(yàn)證據(jù),要求被試判斷每一證據(jù)在命題檢驗(yàn)中的作用。結(jié)果表明:(1)"證真偏向"依然存在,但從正確率來(lái)看,順證真與順證偽沒(méi)有顯著差異;(2)發(fā)現(xiàn)了顯著的順序效應(yīng),與逆向檢驗(yàn)相比,順向檢驗(yàn)有更高的正確率與更短的反應(yīng)時(shí);(3)被試加工與命題"無(wú)關(guān)聯(lián)"刺激時(shí)存在明顯困難,其正確率顯著較低。這些結(jié)果說(shuō)明個(gè)體在判斷不同證據(jù)對(duì)命題檢驗(yàn)的作用時(shí)會(huì)受到命題內(nèi)在方向性的影響,個(gè)體可能會(huì)采用一些固有推理圖式以及簡(jiǎn)單的匹配策略解決問(wèn)題。
[Abstract]:By improving the presentation of the classical four-card problem, the test evidence corresponding to the proposition is presented one by one, and the subjects are required to judge the role of each evidence in the proposition test. The results show that: (1) the "true bias" still exists, but from the correct rate, there is no significant difference between the true and the false; (2) the significant sequence effect is found, compared with the reverse test, the forward test has higher accuracy and shorter response time; (3) there are obvious difficulties in processing and propositional "unrelated" stimulation, and the correct rate is significantly lower. These results show that individuals will be affected by the inherent orientation of propositions when judging the effect of different evidence on propositional testing, and individuals may adopt some inherent reasoning schemas and simple matching strategies to solve the problem.
【作者單位】： 西南交通大學(xué)心理研究與咨詢中心;西南交通大學(xué)公共管理與政法學(xué)院;江西師范大學(xué)心理學(xué)院;深圳大學(xué)心理與社會(huì)學(xué)院;
【基金】：中央高�；究蒲袠I(yè)務(wù)費(fèi)專項(xiàng)資金(26816WBR07) NSFC:31571118 四川省知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)教育與培訓(xùn)(交大)基地(IP011505)
【分類號(hào)】：B842

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 葛明貴;指導(dǎo)語(yǔ)對(duì)解決四卡問(wèn)題影響的實(shí)驗(yàn)研究[J];安徽師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2001年02期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 張慶林;邱江;;四卡問(wèn)題解決中的邏輯分析效應(yīng)[A];第十屆全國(guó)心理學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)大會(huì)論文摘要集[C];2005年

，

本文編號(hào)：2520559