School of Management, University of Bath.
Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences, Brown University.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2020 Aug;149(8):1417-1434. doi: 10.1037/xge0000720. Epub 2019 Dec 2.
Humans are often characterized as Bayesian reasoners. Here, we question the core Bayesian assumption that probabilities reflect degrees of belief. Across eight studies, we find that people instead reason in a digital manner, assuming that uncertain information is either true or false when using that information to make further inferences. Participants learned about 2 hypotheses, both consistent with some information but one more plausible than the other. Although people explicitly acknowledged that the less-plausible hypothesis had positive probability, they ignored this hypothesis when using the hypotheses to make predictions. This was true across several ways of manipulating plausibility (simplicity, evidence fit, explicit probabilities) and a diverse array of task variations. Taken together, the evidence suggests that digitization occurs in prediction because it circumvents processing bottlenecks surrounding people's ability to simulate outcomes in hypothetical worlds. These findings have implications for philosophy of science and for the organization of the mind. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
人类通常被描述为贝叶斯推理者。在这里,我们质疑核心的贝叶斯假设,即概率反映的是置信度的程度。通过八项研究,我们发现人们反而以数字方式进行推理,当使用该信息进行进一步推理时,他们假设不确定的信息不是真的就是假的。参与者学习了两个假设,这两个假设都与一些信息一致,但其中一个比另一个更合理。尽管人们明确承认不太合理的假设具有正概率,但当他们使用这些假设进行预测时,他们忽略了这个假设。这在几种操纵可能性的方法(简单性、证据契合度、明确概率)和各种任务变化中都是如此。总之,这些证据表明,在预测中会出现数字化,因为它避免了人们在假设的世界中模拟结果的能力所带来的处理瓶颈。这些发现对科学哲学和思维的组织都有影响。