受顺序影响的证真偏向：来自四卡问题新范式的证据*

心理与行为研究 ›› 2017, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (1): 54-61.

受顺序影响的证真偏向：来自四卡问题新范式的证据*

蔡雪丽, 吕辉, 李富洪, 李红

西南交通大学心理研究与咨询中心,成都 610031
西南交通大学公共管理与政法学院,成都 610031
江西师范大学心理学院,江西 330022
深圳大学心理与社会学院,深圳 518060

收稿日期:2015-08-09 出版日期:2017-01-20 发布日期:2017-03-02
通讯作者: 李富洪,E-mail：lifuhong@lnnu.edu.cn;李红,E-mail：lihongwrm@vip.sina.com。
基金资助:
中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金（26816WBR07）,NSFC：31571118,四川省知识产权教育与培训（交大）基地（IP011505）

Order-effected Verification Bias: Evidence from new wason's selection task paradigm

Cai Xueli, Lv Hui, Li Fuhong, Li Hong

Research and Counseling Center, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031;
School of Public Administration, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031;
School of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Jiangxi 330022;
School of Psychology and Social, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060

Received:2015-08-09 Online:2017-01-20 Published:2017-03-02

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 通过对经典四卡问题呈现方式的改进,逐一呈现与命题对应的检验证据,要求被试判断每一证据在命题检验中的作用。结果表明：（1）“证真偏向”依然存在,但从正确率来看,顺证真与顺证伪没有显著差异;（2）发现了显著的顺序效应,与逆向检验相比,顺向检验有更高的正确率与更短的反应时;（3）被试加工与命题“无关联”刺激时存在明显困难,其正确率显著较低。这些结果说明个体在判断不同证据对命题检验的作用时会受到命题内在方向性的影响,个体可能会采用一些固有推理图式以及简单的匹配策略解决问题。

关键词: 证真偏向, 顺序效应, 匹配策略

Abstract: To examine different cognitive processing characteristics during hypothesis testing, we presented a modified Wason's selection task by recording reaction time and accuracy. The results showed that this research confirmed the‘verification bias’, which was found only in backward conditions. Second, subjects had better performance in forward testing conditions than backward testing conditions. Finally,“proposition relevance”influenced subjects' reasoning remarkably. These findings suggested that two factors were jointly responsible for a large part of these reasoning outcomes above: the inherent directionality and matching strategy.

Key words: verification bias, directionality effect, matching strategy

中图分类号:

B842.5

蔡雪丽, 吕辉, 李富洪, 李红. 受顺序影响的证真偏向：来自四卡问题新范式的证据*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2017, 15(1): 54-61.

Cai Xueli, Lv Hui, Li Fuhong, Li Hong. Order-effected Verification Bias: Evidence from new wason's selection task paradigm[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2017, 15(1): 54-61.

参考文献

1 蔡雪丽.(2012). 假设检验中假设评估与收敛的神经机制. 西南大学硕士论文.
2 胡竹菁.(2000).(主编). 演绎推理的心理学研究. 北京: 人民教育出版社.
3 李富洪, 曹云飞, 曹碧华, 蔡雪丽, 李红.(2012). 假设形成与检验的神经机制. 心理科学进展, 20(2), 191-196.
4 邱江, 张庆林, 李小平.(2007). 四卡问题解决中的内容与逻辑分析效应. 心理科学, 30, 1356-1358.
5 邱江, 张庆林.(2003). 假设检验策略研究进展述评. 西南师范大学学报, 29, 38-41.
6 王甦, 汪安圣.(1992). 认知心理学. 北京: 北京大学出版社.
7 周国梅, 傅小兰.(2004). 异同判断加工中整体和局部特征的作用. 心理学报, 36, 681-689.
8 张之光, 禤宇明, 傅小兰.(2003). 不同ISI下异同判断的同反应启动效应. 心理学报, 35, 317-322.
9 Barrouillet, P., Grosset, N., & Lecas, J. F.(2000). Conditional reasoning by mental models: Chronometric and developmental evidence. Cognition, 75, 237-266.
10 Bonnefond, M., & Van der Henst, J. B.(2009). What′s behind an inference? An EEG study with conditional arguments. Neuropsychologia, 47, 3125-3133.
11 Braine, M. D. S.(1990). The natural approach to reasoning. In W. F. Overton(Eds.), Reasoning, necessity, and logic: Developmental perspectives(pp. 135-158). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12 Braine, M. D. S., & O′Brien, D. P.(1991). A theory of if: A lexical entry, reasoning program, and pragmatic principles. Psychological Review, 98, 182-203.
13 Canessa, N., Gorini, A., Cappa, S. F., Piattelli-Palmarini, M., Danna, M., Fazio, F., & Perani, D.(2005). The Effect of Social Content on Deductive Reasoning: An fMRI Study. Human Brain Mapping, 26, 30-43.
14 Cai, X., Li, F., Wang, J., Li, H.(2014). Invariance detection in the brain: Revealed in a stepwise category induction task. Brain research, 1575, 55-65.
15 Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J.(1985). Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 391-416.
16 Cocchi, L., Halford, G. S., Zalesky, A., Harding, I. H., Ramm, B. J., Cutmore, T., Shum, D. H. K., Mattingley, J. B.(2013). Complexity in Relational Processing Predicts Changes in Functional Brain Network Dynamics and Jason B. Mattingley. Cerebral Cortex, 1-14.
17 Elliott, R., & Dolan, R. J.(1998). Activation of Different Anterior Cingulate Foci in Association with Hypothesis Testing and Response Selection. Neuroimage, 8, 17-29.
18 Espino, O., Sánchez-Curbelo, I., Bolaños-Medina, A.(2015). Directionality Effect in Double Conditionals. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 18(57), 1-9.
19 Evans, B. T.(1989). Bias in human reasoning: causes and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London.
20 Evans, B. T.(1993). The mental model theory of conditional reasoning: Critical appraisal and revision. Cognition, 48, 1-20.
21 Evans, B. T.(1998). Matching bias in conditional reasoning. Thinking Reasoning, 4, 45-82.
22 Evans, B. T., & Beck, M. A.(1981). Directionality and temporal factors in conditional reasoning. Current Psychological Research, 1, 111-120.
23 Evans, B. T., & Lynch, J. S.(1973). Matching bias in the selection task. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 391-397.
24 Evans, B. T., & Over, D. E.(2004). IF. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
25 Goel, V., Shuren, J. E., Sheesley, L., & Grafman, J.(2004). Asymmetrical involvement of frontal lobes in social reasoning. Brain, 127, 783-790.
26 Houde`, O., Zago, L., Mellet, E., Moutier, S., Pineau, A., Mazoyer, B., Tzourio-Mazoyer, N.(2000). Shifting from the perceptual brain to the logical brain: the neural impact of cognitive inhibition training. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 721-728. Houdé, O.(2000). Inhibition and cognitive development: Object, number, categorization, and reasoning. Cognitive Development, 15, 63-73.
27 Johnson-Laird, P. N.(2001). Mental models and deduction. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(10), 434-442.
28 Johnson-Laird, P. N.(2006). How We Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29 Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J.(1991). Deduction. Hove, England: Erlbaum.
30 Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J.(2002). Conditionals: A theory of meaning, pragmatics and inference. Psychological Review, 109(4), 646-678.
31 Klayman, J., & Ha, Y. W.(1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94, 211-228.
32 Li, F. H., Cao, B. H., Lei, Y., & Li, H.(2009a). Electrophysiological correlates of hypothesis testing. Learning and memory, 20, 197-201.
33 Li, F. H., Cao, B. H., Gao, X. M., Xiao, F., Qing, J. L., & Li, H.(2009b). Temporal course and the electrophysiological correlates of hypothesis testing as revealed in a modified category induction task. Research Report, 1301, 61-67.
34 Li, F., Cao, B., Luo, Y., Lei, Y., & Li, H.(2013). Functional imaging of brain responses to different outcomes of hypothesis testing: revealed in a category induction task. NeuroImage, 66, 368-375.
35 Lea, R. B.(1995). On-line evidence for elaborative inferences in text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 21, 1469-1482.
36 Margolis, H.(1987). Patterns, thinking, and cognition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37 Markovits, H., & Barrouillet, P.(2002). The development of conditional reasoning: A mental model account. Developmental Review, 22, 5-36.
38 Mercier, H., & Sperber, D.(2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34, 57-111.
39 Monti, M. M., Parsons, L. M., & Osherson, D. N.(2009). The boundaries of language and thought in deductive inference. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 106, 12554-12559.
40 Nickerson, R. S.(1996). Hempel′s paradox and Wason′s selection task: Logical and psychological puzzles of confirmation. Thinking and Reasoning, 2, 1-31.
41 Nickerson, R. S.(1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175-220.
42 Oberauer, K., & Wilhelm, O.(2000). Effects of directionality in deductive reasoning: I. The comprehension of single relational premises. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1702-1712.
43 Oberauer, K., H?觟rnig, R., Weidenfel, A., & Wilhelm, O.(2005). Effects of directionality in deductive reasoning: II.Premise integration and conclusion evaluation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 1225-1247.
44 Papo, D., Baudonnie`re, P. M., Hugueville, L., & Caverni, J. P.(2003). Feedback in Hypothesis Testing: An ERP Study. J Cogn Neurosci, 15, 508-522.
45 Papo, D., Douiri, A., Bouchet, F., Bourzeix, J. C., Caverni, J. P., & Baudonnière, P. M.(2007). Time-Frequency Intracranial Source Localization of Feedback-Related EEG Activity in Hypothesis Testing. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 1314-1322.
46 Platt, R. D., & Griggs, R. A.(1993). Facilitation in the abstract selection task: The effects of attentional and instructional factors. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 591-613.
47 Rips, L. J.(1994). The psychology of proof. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48 Roberts1, M. J., & Newton, E. J.(2011). Rapid-response versus free-time selection tasks using different logical connectives. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 23(7), 858-872.
49 Thompson, V. A., Evans, B. T., Campbell, J. I. D.(2013). Matching bias on the selection task: It′s fast and feels good. Thinking & Reasoning, 19(3), 431-452.
50 Wason, P. C.(1968). Reasoning about a rule. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 273-281.
51 Wason, P. C.(1966). Reasoning. In B. Foss(Ed.), New horizons in psychology. Harmonds-worth: Penguin Books, 135-151.
52 Wason, P. C. & Shapiro, D.(1971). Natural and contrived experience in a reasoning task. The Quaterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 23, 63-71.