Suppr超能文献

竞争作为理性行为:为什么幼儿无法欣赏竞争性游戏。

Competition as rational action: why young children cannot appreciate competitive games.

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Salzburg, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria.

出版信息

J Exp Child Psychol. 2013 Oct;116(2):545-59. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.10.008. Epub 2012 Nov 22.

Abstract

Understanding rational actions requires perspective taking both with respect to means and with respect to objectives. This study addresses the question of whether the two kinds of perspective taking develop simultaneously or in sequence. It is argued that evidence from competitive behavior is best suited for settling this issue. A total of 71 kindergarten children between 3 and 5 years of age participated in a competitive game of dice and were tested on two traditional false belief stories as well as on several control tasks (verbal intelligence, inhibitory control, and working memory). The frequency of competitive poaching moves in the game correlated with correct predictions of mistaken actions in the false belief task. Hierarchical linear regression after controlling for age and control variables showed that false belief understanding significantly predicted the amount of poaching moves. The results speak for an interrelated development of the capacity for "instrumental" and "telic" perspective taking. They are discussed in the light of teleology as opposed to theory use and simulation.

摘要

理解理性行为需要从手段和目标两个方面进行换位思考。本研究探讨了这两种换位思考是同时发展还是依次发展的问题。有人认为,来自竞争行为的证据最适合解决这个问题。共有 71 名 3 至 5 岁的幼儿园儿童参与了掷骰子的竞争游戏,并接受了两个传统错误信念故事以及几个控制任务(语言智力、抑制控制和工作记忆)的测试。游戏中竞争窥探行为的频率与错误信念任务中错误行为的正确预测相关。在控制年龄和控制变量后进行的层次线性回归显示,错误信念理解显著预测了窥探行为的数量。这些结果表明“工具性”和“目的论”换位思考能力的相互关联发展。它们在与理论使用和模拟相反的目的论的背景下进行了讨论。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/69ea/3778405/fcf18281109f/gr1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验