Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2018 Nov;147(11):1677-1712. doi: 10.1037/xge0000478. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
Formal or categorical explanation involves the use of a label to explain a property of an object or group of objects. In four experiments, we provide evidence that label entrenchment, the degree to which a label is accepted and used by members of the community, influences the judged quality of a categorical explanation whether or not the explanation offers substantive information about the explanandum. Experiment 1 shows that explanations using unentrenched labels are seen as less comprehensive and less natural, independent of the causal information they provide. Experiment 2 shows that these intuitions persist when the community has no additional, relevant featural information, so the label amounts to a mere name for the explanandum. Experiment 3 finds a similar effect when the unentrenched label is not widely used, but is defined by a group of experts and the recipient of the explanation is herself an expert familiar with the topic. The effect also obtains for categories that lack a coherent causal structure. Experiment 4 further demonstrates the domain generality of the entrenchment effect and provides evidence against several interpretations of the results. A majority of participants in Experiments 3 and 4 could not report the impact of entrenchment on their judgments. We argue that this reliance on community cues arose because the community often has useful information to provide about categories. The common use of labels as conduits for this communal knowledge results in reliance on community cues even when they are uninformative. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
形式或范畴解释涉及使用标签来解释对象或对象群体的属性。在四项实验中,我们提供了证据表明标签根深蒂固,即标签被社区成员接受和使用的程度,会影响对范畴解释的判断质量,而不论解释是否提供了有关被解释对象的实质性信息。实验 1 表明,使用不根深蒂固的标签的解释被认为不那么全面和自然,而与它们提供的因果信息无关。实验 2 表明,当社区没有其他相关特征信息时,这些直觉仍然存在,因此标签相当于被解释对象的一个名称。实验 3 在不广泛使用但由一组专家定义的未根深蒂固的标签的情况下发现了类似的效果,并且解释的接受者本身就是熟悉该主题的专家。对于缺乏连贯因果结构的类别,也会产生类似的效果。实验 4 进一步证明了根深蒂固效应的领域普遍性,并为结果的几种解释提供了证据。实验 3 和实验 4 的大多数参与者无法报告根深蒂固对他们判断的影响。我们认为,这种对社区线索的依赖是由于社区通常可以提供有关类别有用的信息。标签通常被用作这种集体知识的渠道,这导致即使社区线索没有提供信息,也会依赖社区线索。(PsycINFO 数据库记录(c)2018 APA,保留所有权利)。