材料性质与认知风格对特征归纳与预测的影响

发布时间：2019-06-21 15:11

【摘要】：归纳思维涉及到在已有知识的基础上对新异情境做出预测,而这些预测都是概率性的。对于具有某特征的个例,个体有一定的信心将其归纳到某一类群,也会猜测该个例还具有其他哪些属性但是却对此并无十足把握,这就是特征归纳与预测。研究抽取181名大学生开展两项实验,以探索材料性质、认知方式对特征归纳与预测的影响。实验一采用3(材料性质：字母数字代码、中文词汇和图形)×2(认知风格：场独立和场依存)×3(类别内代表性：高代表性、中代表性和低代表性)的混合实验设计,来研究目标特征类别确定时材料性质、认知风格与类别内代表性对特征归纳与预测的影响。实验二同样采用3(材料性质：字母数字代码、中文词汇和图形)×2(认知风格：场独立和场依存)×3(类别内代表性：高代表性、中代表性和低代表性)的混合实验设计,来研究目标特征类别不确定时材料性质、认知风格与类别内代表性对特征归纳与预测的影响。因变量为被试特征归纳与预测任务的正确率、反应时与信心程度。结果显示：(1)无论目标特征类别确定与否,特征归纳与特征预测在性别上均存在显著差异,男生反应时均显著长于女生。(2)无论目标特征类别确定与否,特征归纳与特征预测在材料性质上均存在显著差异,中文词汇材料和字母数字代码材料的反应时均显著长于图形材料。(3)特征归纳推理在类别内代表性上存在显著差异,无论目标特征类别确定与否,类别内代表性越高,信心程度也越高。在目标特征类别确定的特征归纳任务中,类别内代表性越高,反应越快；而在目标特征类别不确定时的特征归纳任务中,高代表性和低代表性的反应时均显著长于中代表性。(4)在目标特征类别不确定时的特征归纳任务中学科性质与认知风格存在交互作用,理科生中场依存者的反应时显著长于场独立者；而文科生中场依存者的反应时显著短于场独立者。(5)在目标特征类别确定时的特征预测任务中,被试的信心值比例与特征联结说理论比例差异不显著,而与类别说理论比例差异显著；在目标特征类别不确定时的特征预测任务中,被试的信心值比例与综合特征联结说理论比例差异不显著,而与类别说和单类特征联结说理论比例差异显著。研究结论：(1)材料性质、认知风格、学科性质与性别都对特征归纳与预测产生一定影响。(2)类别内代表性影响特征归纳,代表性越高特征归纳的信心度也越高。(3)在目标特征类别确定时的特征预测任务中,个体倾向于根据特征联结模型进行特征预测；在目标特征类别不确定时的特征预测任务中,个体更倾向于根据综合特征联结模型进行特征预测。
[Abstract]:Inductive thinking involves predicting new situations on the basis of existing knowledge, and these predictions are probabilistic. For a case with a certain characteristic, the individual has certain confidence to sum it up to a certain group, and he will also guess which other attributes the case has, but it is not fully sure of it, which is called feature induction and prediction. In order to explore the influence of material properties and cognitive style on feature induction and prediction, 181 college students were selected to carry out two experiments. In experiment 1, a mixed experimental design of 3 (material properties: alphabetical code, Chinese vocabulary and graphics) 脳 2 (cognitive style: field independence and field dependence) 脳 3 (intra-category representation: high representativeness, medium representativeness and low representativeness) was used to study the effects of material properties, cognitive style and intra-category representation on feature induction and prediction in the determination of target feature categories. In experiment 2, the mixed experimental design of 3 (material properties: alphabetical code, Chinese vocabulary and graphics) 脳 2 (cognitive style: field independence and field dependence) 脳 3 (intra-category representation: high representativeness, medium representativeness and low representativeness) was also used to study the effects of material properties, cognitive style and intra-category representation on feature induction and prediction when the target feature category was uncertain. The dependent variables were the correct rate, reaction time and confidence degree of induction and prediction tasks. The results showed that: (1) there were significant differences in gender between feature induction and feature prediction, and the reaction time of boys was significantly longer than that of female students. (2) there were significant differences in material properties between feature induction and feature prediction, regardless of whether the target feature category was determined or not. The reaction time of Chinese vocabulary materials and alphabetical code materials is significantly longer than that of graphic materials. (3) there are significant differences in the representation of feature induction reasoning in categories, regardless of whether the target feature category is determined or not, the higher the representativeness in the category, the higher the degree of confidence. In the task of feature induction determined by the target feature category, the higher the representation in the category, the faster the response. In the task of feature induction when the target feature category is uncertain, the reaction time of high representativeness and low representativeness is significantly longer than that of middle representativeness. (4) there is interaction between subject nature and cognitive style in feature induction task when the target feature category is uncertain, and the reaction time of science students in midfield dependence is significantly longer than that of field independent. However, the response time of liberal arts students in midfield dependence is significantly shorter than that of field independent subjects. (5) in the task of feature prediction when the target feature category is determined, there is no significant difference between the ratio of confidence value and the theory of feature connection theory, but there is a significant difference between the ratio of confidence value and the theory of category theory. In the task of feature prediction when the target feature category is uncertain, there is no significant difference between the ratio of confidence value and the theory of comprehensive feature association, but there is a significant difference between the ratio of confidence value and the theory of comprehensive feature association, but with that of category theory and single type feature association theory. The conclusions are as follows: (1) material properties, cognitive style, subject nature and gender all have certain effects on feature induction and prediction. (2) representation affects feature induction, and the higher the representation, the higher the confidence of feature induction. (3) in the task of feature prediction when the target feature category is determined, the individual tends to predict the feature according to the feature connection model; In the task of feature prediction when the target feature category is uncertain, individuals are more inclined to carry out feature prediction according to the comprehensive feature connection model.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：B842.1

【相似文献】