Robison Matthew K, Unsworth Nash
a Department of Psychology , University of Oregon , Eugene , OR , USA.
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2017 Aug;70(8):1471-1484. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2016.1188406. Epub 2016 Jun 7.
In two experiments, we investigated the possibility that individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) would provide resistance to belief bias in syllogistic reasoning. In Experiment 1 (N = 157), participants showed a belief bias effect in that they had longer response times and decreased accuracy on syllogisms with conflict between the validity and believability of the conclusion than on syllogisms with no such conflict. However, this effect did not differ as a function of individual differences in WMC. Experiment 2 (N = 122) replicated this effect with the addition of decontextualized (i.e., nonsense) syllogisms as a different means of measuring the magnitude of the belief bias effect. Although individual differences in WMC and fluid intelligence were related to better reasoning overall, the magnitude of the belief bias effect was not smaller for participants with greater WMC. The present study offers two novel findings: (a) The belief bias effect is independent of individual differences in WMC and fluid intelligence, and (b) resolving conflict in verbal reasoning is not a type of conflict resolution that correlates with individual differences in WMC, further establishing boundary conditions for the role of WMC in human cognitive processes.
在两项实验中,我们探究了工作记忆容量(WMC)的个体差异是否会在三段论推理中对信念偏差产生抵抗力。在实验1(N = 157)中,参与者表现出信念偏差效应,即与结论的有效性和可信度不存在冲突的三段论相比,对于结论的有效性和可信度存在冲突的三段论,他们的反应时间更长,准确性更低。然而,这种效应并未因WMC的个体差异而有所不同。实验2(N = 122)重复了这一效应,并增加了去情境化(即无意义)的三段论,作为测量信念偏差效应大小的一种不同方式。尽管WMC和流体智力的个体差异总体上与更好的推理相关,但对于WMC较高的参与者而言,信念偏差效应的大小并未更小。本研究提供了两个新发现:(a)信念偏差效应与WMC和流体智力的个体差异无关;(b)言语推理中的冲突解决并非一种与WMC个体差异相关的冲突解决类型,这进一步确立了WMC在人类认知过程中作用的边界条件。