本文關(guān)鍵詞：歸納推理屬性效應(yīng)中背景關(guān)系提取原則的探究，由筆耕文化傳播整理發(fā)布。

1154 心 理 學(xué) 報(bào) 42卷

Kalish, C. W., & Gelman, S. A. (1992). On wooden pillows: Multiple classifications and children’s category-based inductions. Child Development, 63, 1536–1557.

Kemp, C., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009). Structured statistical models of inductive reasoning. Psychological Review, 116(1), 20–58.

Lin, E. L., & Murphy, G. L. (2001). Thematic relations in adults’ concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(1), 3–28.

Lopez, A., Atran, S., Coley, J. D., Medin, D. L., & Smith, E. E. (1997). The tree of life: Universal and cultural features of folk-biological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 251–295.

Mandler, J. M., & McDonough, L. (1996). Drinking and driving don’t mix: Inductive generalization in infancy. Cognition, 59, 307–335.

Mandler, J. M., & McDonough, L. (1998). Studies in inductive inference in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 37, 60–96.

Medin, D. L., & Ortony, A. (1989). Psychological essentialism. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 179–195), Cambridge.

Robinson, L. B., & Hastie, R. (1985). Revision of beliefs when a hypothesis is eliminated from consideration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 11, 443–456.

Ross, B. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1999). Food for thought: Cross-classification and category organization in a complex real world domain. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 495–553. Sachs, O., Weis, S., Krings, T., Huber, W., & Kircher, T. (2008). Categorical and thematic knowledge representation in the brain: Neural correlates of taxonomic and thematic conceptual relations. Neuropsychologia, 46, 409–418.

Schumacher, R., Wirth, M., Perrig, W. J., Strik, W., & Koenig, T. (2009). ERP correlates of superordinate category activation. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 72, 134–144.

Shafto, P., & Coley, J. D. (2003). Development of categorization and reasoning in the natural world: Novices to experts, naive similarity to ecological knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 641–649.

Shafto, P., Kemp, C., Baraff, E., Coley, J., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2005). Context-sensitive induction. In B. G. Bara, L. Barsalou, & M. Bucciarelli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2003–2008), Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum.

Shafto, P., Coley, J.D., & Baldwin, D. (2007). Effects of time pressure on context-sensitive property induction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 890–895.

Shafto, P., Kemp, C., Bonawitz, E. B., Coley, J. D., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2008). Inductive reasoning about causally transmitted properties. Cognition, 109, 175–192. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

Vasilyeva, N.Y., Coley, J.D., Muratore, T.M. (2009). Interaction of Taxonomic and Contextual Knowledge in Categorization of Cross-Classified Instances. Proceedings papers of 2009 Cognitive Science Conference, pp. 721–726. Vitkin, A., & Coley, J. D. (2005). Accessibility of taxonomic and script knowledge in the domain of food. Paper presented at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Toronto.

(2)在歸納推理活動中負(fù)相關(guān)背景關(guān)系的提取雖然不會顯著影響人們的推理可能性, 但會顯著降低人們的推理信心。

(3)歸納推理屬性效應(yīng)的心理加工機(jī)制具有跨文化的普遍性, 而表現(xiàn)形式則存在一定的文化特殊性, 與國外研究結(jié)果不同, 中國大學(xué)生被試在類別關(guān)系背景下對基因?qū)傩缘耐评砜赡苄燥@著大于疾病屬性, 而在生態(tài)關(guān)系背景下對兩類屬性的推理可能性則無顯著差異。

參 考 文 獻(xiàn)

Chen, A. T., Li, H., Yang, Y. Y., Long, C. Q., & Li, F. H. (2008). Is inductive reasoning domain free or domain specific ? —An experimental evidence. Psychological Science, 31, 567–570.

[陳安濤, 李紅, 楊耘云, 龍長權(quán), 李富洪等. (2008). 歸納推理是領(lǐng)域特殊還是領(lǐng)域一般的? 一項(xiàng)實(shí)驗(yàn)研究證據(jù), 心

理科學(xué), 31, 567–570.]

Chen, A. T., & Li, H. (2003). Research on the psychological effects of inductive inference. Advances in Psychological Science, 11(6), 607–615.

[陳安濤, 李紅. (2003). 歸納推理心理效應(yīng)的研究, 心理科

學(xué)進(jìn)展, 11(6), 607–615.]

Chip, H., & Rich, G. (1995). Interaction with others increases decision confidence but not decision quality: evidence against information collection views of interactive decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 305–326

Coley, J. D., & Baraff, E. (2003). Effects of time pressure on expert and novice category-based induction. Paper to be presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Vancouver, British Columbia.

Coley, J. D., Vitkin, A. Z., Seaton, C. E., & Yopchick, J. E. (2005). Effects of experience on relational inferences in children: The case of folk biology. In B. G. Bara, L. Barsalou, & M. Bucciarelli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 471–475). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.

Gelman, S. A., & Markman, E. M. (1986) . Categories and induction in young children. Cognition, 23, 183–209.

Gelman, S. A. (1988). The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 65–95

Gelman, S. A. (2004). Psychological essentialism in children. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 404–409.

Heit, E., & Rubinstein, J. (1994). Similarity and property effects in inductive reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 411–422. Heit, E. (2000). Properties of inductive reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 569–592

Jiang, K., & Xiong, Z. H. (2008). Why models of domain general inductive inference are impossible. Journal of Nanjing Normal University( Social science), 5(3), 106–112. [蔣柯, 熊哲宏. (2008). 為什么歸納推理的領(lǐng)域一般性模型是不可能的. 南京師大學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版), 5(3), 106–112.]

12期 崔亞飛 等: 歸納推理屬性效應(yīng)中背景關(guān)系提取原則的探究

快速疾�。篎(2,39)=12.78, p﹤0.001, R2=0.41 延遲基因：F(2,39)=12.06, p﹤0.001, R2=0.40 延遲疾�。篎(2,39)=0.61, p=0.55, R2=0.03 推理信心：

快速基因：F(2,39)=6.08, p﹤0.01, R2=0.25 快速疾�。篎(2,39)=7.46, p﹤0.01, R2=0.29 延遲基因：F(2,39)=0.21, p=0.82, R2=0.01 延遲疾病：F(2,39)=2.56, p=0.09, R2=0.12

1155

附錄:

1 各實(shí)驗(yàn)組按鍵狀況卡方檢驗(yàn)顯著性數(shù)據(jù):

快速基因：χ2 (2) =51.44, p<0.001 快速疾�。害�2 (2)=48.86, p<0.001 延遲基因：χ2 (2)=47.70, p<0.001 延遲疾病：χ2(2)=53.06, p<0.001 2 各實(shí)驗(yàn)組回歸方程顯著性數(shù)據(jù)：

推理可能性：

快速基因：F(2,39)=41.21, p﹤0.001, R2=0.69

The Principle of Extracting Background Relations in

Property Effect of Inductive Reasoning

CUI Ya-Fei; LI Hong; LI Fu-Hong

(Key Laboratory of Cognitive and Personality of Ministry of Education(SWU);

Psychology School of Southwest University, Chongqing 400715 China)

Abstract

Property effect, also called interaction between properties and premise-conclusion matches, is an important psychological effect in inductive reasoning, which suggested that people could base on the background relation (relations between premise and conclusion) property most relevant to. At the same time, previous studies showed that different types of background relation vary in their relative accessibility. Therefore, the current study tries to examine which kind of background relation people would give priority to, the most accessible or the property most relevant, in inductive reasoning.

The experiment consisted of two parts: a property induction task followed by a belief- assessment task, both were conducted on the computer using E-Prime. In the induction task, 64 Chinese undergraduates were told about a novel gene or a novel disease that was true of one category of animals, they had to judge whether taxonomically, ecologically, and unrelated animals had the same property or not, under speeded or delayed conditions. Under speeded conditions the second category of animals presented 1s (delayed conditions 15s), participants were asked to judge as quickly as possible after they disappeared. After the judgment, they were asked to evaluate the confidence in their judgment. In the belief-assessment task, participants were shown each item again and asked “Do these animals live in the same habitat?” and “Do these animals belong to the same biological category?” They answered “yes” “no” or “don’t know”.

The result revealed that: (1) Property effect was independent of time pressure. The possibility of reasoning(the percent of judged “yes” in the induction task) for gene between taxonomically related animals was greater than for disease in both speeded and delayed conditions, but between ecologically related animals, there was no difference. (2) Time pressure affected the confidence of reasoning, higher in speeded conditions than in delayed conditions. (3) In the speeded conditions, both taxonomical and ecological relatedness beliefs could predict the possibility and confidence of reasoning, but in delayed conditions both beliefs couldn’t.

These results proved that people are firstly extract the background relation property most relevant to then extract those less relevant or un-relevant in inductive reasoning. Key words inductive reasoning; property effect; time pressure

博泰典藏網(wǎng)btdcw.com包含總結(jié)匯報(bào)、行業(yè)論文、高中教育、自然科學(xué)、經(jīng)管營銷、表格模板、高等教育、出國留學(xué)以及歸納推理屬性效應(yīng)中背景關(guān)系提取原則的探究等內(nèi)容。

本文共2頁12

  本文關(guān)鍵詞：歸納推理屬性效應(yīng)中背景關(guān)系提取原則的探究，由筆耕文化傳播整理發(fā)布。