Rogers Paul, Qualter Pamela, Wood Dave
Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit (APRU), Department of Psychology, Goldsmith's College, University of London, UK.
School of Psychology, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.
Br J Psychol. 2016 Nov;107(4):710-751. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12173. Epub 2016 Feb 2.
Two studies examine the impact event vividness, event severity, and prior paranormal belief has on causal attributions for a depicted remarkable coincidence experience. In Study 1, respondents (n = 179) read a hypothetical vignette in which a fictional character accurately predicts a plane crash 1 day before it occurs. The crash was described in either vivid or pallid terms with the final outcome being either severe (fatal) or non-severe (non-fatal). Respondents completed 29 causal attribution items, one attribution confidence item, nine scenario perception items, a popular paranormal belief scale, and a standard demographics questionnaire. Principal axis factoring reduced the 29 attribution items to four attribution factors which were then subjected to a 2 (event vividness) × 2 (event severity) × 2 (paranormal belief) MANCOVA controlling for respondent gender. As expected, paranormal believers attributed the accurate crash prediction less to coincidence and more to both paranormal and transcendental knowing than did paranormal sceptics. Furthermore, paranormal (psychokinesis) believers deemed the prediction more reflective of paranormal knowing to both (1) a vivid/non-fatal and (2) a pallid/fatal crash depiction. Vividness, severity, and paranormal belief types had no impact on attribution confidence. In Study 2, respondents (also n = 179) generated data that were a moderately good fit to the previous factor structure and replicated several differences across attributional pairings albeit for paranormal non-believers only. Corresponding effects for event severity and paranormal belief were not replicated. Findings are discussed in terms of their support for the paranormal misattribution hypothesis and the impact of availability biases in the form of both vividness and severity effects. Methodological issues and future research ideas are also discussed.
两项研究考察了事件生动性、事件严重性和先前的超自然信念对所描述的显著巧合经历的因果归因的影响。在研究1中，受访者（n = 179）阅读了一个假设的小故事，其中一个虚构角色在飞机坠毁前一天准确地预测了这起事件。坠机事件用生动或平淡的语言进行了描述，最终结果要么是严重的（致命），要么是非严重的（非致命）。受访者完成了29个因果归因项目、一个归因信心项目、9个情景感知项目、一个流行的超自然信念量表和一份标准的人口统计学调查问卷。主轴因子分析将29个归因项目缩减为四个归因因子，然后对其进行2（事件生动性）×2（事件严重性）×2（超自然信念）的多变量协方差分析，并控制受访者性别。正如预期的那样，与超自然怀疑论者相比，超自然信念者将准确的坠机预测归因于巧合的程度更低，而归因于超自然和先验认知的程度更高。此外，超自然（心灵感应）信念者认为，对于（1）生动/非致命和（2）平淡/致命的坠机描述，该预测更能反映超自然认知。生动性、严重性和超自然信念类型对归因信心没有影响。在研究2中，受访者（同样n = 179）生成的数据与先前的因子结构适度拟合，并复制了几个归因配对之间的差异，不过仅针对超自然不信者。事件严重性和超自然信念的相应影响未被复制。研究结果根据其对超自然错误归因假设的支持以及生动性和严重性效应形式的可得性偏差的影响进行了讨论。还讨论了方法学问题和未来的研究思路。
