• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

摘要筛选任务:新数据与近乎全面的模型

The abstract selection task: new data and an almost comprehensive model.

作者信息

Klauer Karl Christoph, Stahl Christoph, Erdfelder Edgar

机构信息

Institut fur Psychologie, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitat Freiburg, Frieburg, Germany.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Jul;33(4):680-703. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.680.

DOI:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.680
PMID:17576147
Abstract

A complete quantitative account of P. Wason's (1966) abstract selection task is proposed. The account takes the form of a mathematical model. It is assumed that some response patterns are caused by inferential reasoning, whereas other responses reflect cognitive processes that affect each card selection separately and independently of other card selections. The model parameters assess the contributions of different interpretational, inferential, and heuristic factors that jointly determine performance in the selection task. The interpretation of most of the model parameters in terms of these different factors is validated experimentally. This model of the selection task is the first to account for the observed frequencies of all 16 possible response patterns that can arise.

摘要

本文提出了对P. 沃森(1966年)抽象选择任务的完整定量描述。该描述采用数学模型的形式。假定某些反应模式是由推理过程引起的,而其他反应则反映了认知过程,这些认知过程分别且独立于其他卡片选择地影响每张卡片的选择。模型参数评估了不同的解释、推理和启发式因素的作用,这些因素共同决定了选择任务中的表现。通过实验验证了根据这些不同因素对大多数模型参数的解释。这个选择任务模型是第一个能够解释所有可能出现的16种反应模式的观察频率的模型。

相似文献

1
The abstract selection task: new data and an almost comprehensive model.摘要筛选任务:新数据与近乎全面的模型
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Jul;33(4):680-703. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.680.
2
A quantitative model of optimal data selection in Wason's selection task.华生选择任务中最优数据选择的定量模型。
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2002 Oct;55(4):1241-72. doi: 10.1080/02724980244000053.
3
Probabilities and utilities of fictional outcomes in Wason's four-card selection task.沃森四卡片选择任务中虚构结果的概率与效用。
Cognition. 1994 Jan;51(1):1-28. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90007-8.
4
Alternative antecedents, probabilities, and the suppression of fallacies in Wason's selection task.替代前因、概率与沃森选择任务中谬误的抑制
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2002 Jul;55(3):799-818. doi: 10.1080/02724980143000497.
5
The suppression of q card selections: evidence for deductive inference in Wason's selection task.对Q卡片选择的抑制:沃森选择任务中演绎推理的证据
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2000 Nov;53(4):1224-42. doi: 10.1080/713755944.
6
Précis of bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning.《贝叶斯理性:人类推理的概率方法》概要
Behav Brain Sci. 2009 Feb;32(1):69-84; discussion 85-120. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X09000284.
7
Explaining purportedly irrational behavior by modeling skepticism in task parameters: an example examining confidence in forced-choice tasks.通过对任务参数中的怀疑态度进行建模来解释据称不合理的行为:以检验强制选择任务中的信心为例。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2004 Sep;30(5):947-59. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.5.947.
8
Automatic-heuristic and executive-analytic processing during reasoning: Chronometric and dual-task considerations.推理过程中的自动启发式和执行分析处理:计时与双任务考量
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2006 Jun;59(6):1070-100. doi: 10.1080/02724980543000123.
9
Explaining inappropriate strategy selection in a simple reasoning task.解释简单推理任务中不恰当的策略选择。
Br J Psychol. 2007 Nov;98(Pt 4):627-44. doi: 10.1348/000712607X173763.
10
Differential access to information and anticipated group interaction: impact on individual reasoning.信息获取差异与预期的群体互动:对个体推理的影响
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2005 Apr;88(4):619-31. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.619.

引用本文的文献

1
On aggregation invariance of multinomial processing tree models.多项处理树模型的聚合不变性。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Dec;56(8):8677-8694. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02497-y. Epub 2024 Oct 14.
2
Time pressure and deliberation affect moral punishment.时间压力和深思熟虑会影响道德惩罚。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jul 16;14(1):16378. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-67268-3.
3
People punish defection, not failures to conform to the majority.人们惩罚的是背叛,而不是未能从众。
Sci Rep. 2024 Jan 12;14(1):1211. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-50414-8.
4
The Brain Structure and Intrinsic Characters of Falsification Thinking in Conditional Proposition Testing.条件命题检验中证伪思维的脑结构及内在特征
Front Hum Neurosci. 2021 Aug 23;15:684470. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2021.684470. eCollection 2021.
5
Characterizing belief bias in syllogistic reasoning: A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of ROC data.三段论推理中信念偏差的特征分析:ROC数据的分层贝叶斯元分析
Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Dec;25(6):2141-2174. doi: 10.3758/s13423-018-1460-7.
6
Separating conditional and unconditional cooperation in a sequential Prisoner's Dilemma game.在序贯囚徒困境博弈中区分条件合作和无条件合作。
PLoS One. 2017 Nov 9;12(11):e0187952. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187952. eCollection 2017.
7
Extending multinomial processing tree models to measure the relative speed of cognitive processes.扩展多项式加工树模型以测量认知过程的相对速度。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Oct;23(5):1440-1465. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1025-6.
8
The Bayesian boom: good thing or bad?贝叶斯方法的兴起:是好是坏?
Front Psychol. 2014 Aug 8;5:765. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00765. eCollection 2014.
9
Explaining individual differences in cognitive processes underlying hindsight bias.解释后见之明偏差背后认知过程的个体差异。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2015 Apr;22(2):328-48. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0691-5.
10
How emotions affect logical reasoning: evidence from experiments with mood-manipulated participants, spider phobics, and people with exam anxiety.情绪如何影响逻辑推理:来自对情绪操控参与者、蜘蛛恐惧症患者及考试焦虑者实验的证据。
Front Psychol. 2014 Jun 10;5:570. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00570. eCollection 2014.