發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-07-24 08:18

【摘要】：日常生活中,人們對(duì)自己的評(píng)價(jià)往往存在偏差,而過(guò)度自信就是其中一種最為典型的現(xiàn)象。由于過(guò)度自信的普遍存在,也引起了研究者們的關(guān)注。而對(duì)于過(guò)度自信的出現(xiàn)的原因,不同的學(xué)者有著不同的解釋,例如,一些學(xué)者認(rèn)為,過(guò)度自信之所以存在,在于過(guò)度自信者存在元認(rèn)知的缺陷。他們認(rèn)為,過(guò)度自信者面臨著一種雙重困境：他們不僅表現(xiàn)很差,而且不能意識(shí)到自己表現(xiàn)很差。最近的一些研究表明,過(guò)度自信者雖然存在著一定的元認(rèn)知缺陷,但仍能從某種程度上意識(shí)到自己的不足。因此本研究想探討過(guò)度自信者是否可以意識(shí)到自己的不足以及在多大范圍內(nèi)能夠意識(shí)到。 預(yù)備實(shí)驗(yàn)采用問(wèn)卷調(diào)查的方式,要求被試完成一份包括85道一般性知識(shí)問(wèn)題的問(wèn)卷。根據(jù)被試完成的實(shí)際情況,選出各20道一般性知識(shí)問(wèn)題,作為兩個(gè)正式實(shí)驗(yàn)的實(shí)驗(yàn)材料。對(duì)存在爭(zhēng)議的任務(wù)難度也進(jìn)行了控制,使其保持在中等難度水平。 正式實(shí)驗(yàn)中,被試首先回答20道一般性知識(shí)問(wèn)題,接著對(duì)每一題的回答做出信心評(píng)價(jià),預(yù)測(cè)自己的答對(duì)題數(shù)以及百分位排名,然后給予被試一次隨機(jī)反饋,要求被試對(duì)反饋?zhàn)龀鲂判脑u(píng)價(jià)。其中,實(shí)驗(yàn)一采用了積極反饋和消極反饋兩種形式,實(shí)驗(yàn)二則采用了四種更加具體的反饋形式：25%以下、25%50%之間、50%75%之間、75%以上,反饋水平由低到高。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果如下： 一、被試整體上表現(xiàn)出了過(guò)度自信,包括過(guò)高估計(jì)、過(guò)分精確和過(guò)高定位。被試傾向于相信反饋,反饋?zhàn)饔玫玫襟w現(xiàn)。 二、出現(xiàn)了Dunning-Kruger效應(yīng),即低表現(xiàn)者出現(xiàn)了過(guò)度自信,高表現(xiàn)者出現(xiàn)了輕微的低度自信。低表現(xiàn)者的預(yù)測(cè)成績(jī)都顯著低于高表現(xiàn)者,雖然低表現(xiàn)者出現(xiàn)了過(guò)度自信,但仍然認(rèn)為自己的能力不會(huì)太高。 三、無(wú)論是高表現(xiàn)者還是低表現(xiàn)者,都傾向于相信積極反饋。但對(duì)于積極反饋,高表現(xiàn)者的信心評(píng)價(jià)顯著高于低表現(xiàn)者；對(duì)于消極反饋,高表現(xiàn)者的信心評(píng)價(jià)卻顯著低于低表現(xiàn)者。說(shuō)明高表現(xiàn)者的元認(rèn)知水平更高,能在更大范圍內(nèi)監(jiān)控自己的行為表現(xiàn)。 四、高表現(xiàn)者對(duì)反饋的信心評(píng)價(jià)隨著反饋水平的上升而增加,低表現(xiàn)者對(duì)反饋的信心評(píng)價(jià)在一定范圍內(nèi)隨著反饋水平的上升(從25%以下到50%75%之間)而增加,但隨著反饋水平的進(jìn)一步增加(75%以上),他們的信心評(píng)價(jià)出現(xiàn)了顯著性下降。雖然低表現(xiàn)者存在著元認(rèn)知的缺陷,但他們?nèi)匀荒軌蛟谝欢ǚ秶鷥?nèi)監(jiān)控自己的行為表現(xiàn)。 綜上所述,本研究在以往研究基礎(chǔ)上,證明了過(guò)度自信者可以意識(shí)到自己的不足,同時(shí)可以在一定范圍內(nèi)監(jiān)控自己的行為表現(xiàn)。
[Abstract]:In daily life, people often have bias in their own evaluation, and overconfidence is one of the most typical phenomena. Due to the prevalence of overconfidence, researchers also pay attention to it. However, different scholars have different explanations for the emergence of overconfidence. For example, some scholars believe that overconfidence exists because of metacognitive defects. They argue that overconfident people face a double dilemma: not only do they perform poorly, but they don't realize they're doing badly. Recent studies have shown that overconfident people are aware of their shortcomings to some extent despite their metacognitive defects. Therefore, this study aims to explore whether and to what extent overconfident people are aware of their shortcomings. The preparatory experiment was conducted with a questionnaire, which included 85 general knowledge questions. According to the actual situation of the subjects, 20 general knowledge questions are selected as experimental materials for two formal experiments. The difficulty of the disputed task is also controlled to keep it at the medium level. In the formal experiment, the subjects first answered 20 general knowledge questions, then evaluated their confidence in the answers to each question, predicted their correct answers and percentile rankings, and then gave the participants a random feedback. Participants were asked to make a confidence assessment of the feedback. Among them, experiment one adopts positive feedback and negative feedback, and experiment two adopts four more specific feedback forms: 25% or less 25% or 50% or 75%, the feedback level is from low to high. The results are as follows: first, the subjects showed overconfidence, including overestimation, over-accuracy and over-positioning. Participants tend to believe in feedback, and feedback is reflected. Secondly, there is Dunning-Kruger effect, that is, the low performance person appears overconfidence, the high performance person appears the slight low confidence. The predicted results of the low performers were significantly lower than those of the high performers. Although the low performers had overconfidence, they still thought that their abilities were not too high. Third, both high and low performers tend to believe in positive feedback. But for positive feedback, the confidence evaluation of high performance is significantly higher than that of low performance, while for negative feedback, the confidence evaluation of high performance is significantly lower than that of low performance. It shows that the metacognition level of high performance is higher and can monitor their behavior in a wider range. Fourth, the confidence evaluation of high performance people to feedback increases with the increase of feedback level, and the confidence evaluation of low performance people increases with the increase of feedback level (from below 25% to 50%) in a certain range. However, with the further increase of feedback (more than 75%), their confidence evaluation decreased significantly. Although low-performance people have metacognitive defects, they can monitor their behavior to a certain extent. In conclusion, based on previous studies, this study proves that overconfident people can realize their shortcomings and monitor their behavior to a certain extent.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：陜西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：B842.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 董奇;論元認(rèn)知[J];北京師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1989年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：2140783