Hurlburt Russell T, Heavey Christopher L, Lapping-Carr Leiszle, Krumm Alek E, Moynihan Stefanie A, Kaneshiro Cody, Brouwers Vincent P, Turner Dio K, Kelsey Jason M
Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Mar;17(2):559-571. doi: 10.1177/1745691621990379. Epub 2021 Jul 20.
Inner experience is widely accepted by psychologists and lay people as being straightforwardly observable: Inner speech, visual images, feelings, and so on are understood to be directly apprehendable "before the footlights of consciousness." Many psychologists hold that such characteristics of inner experience play substantial theoretical roles and have applied significance across a wide range of cognitive, affective, performance, and clinical situations. If so, the frequency of occurrence of these characteristics is of fundamental importance. Such frequencies are usually estimated by questionnaires or by questionnaire-based experience sampling. However, there are reasons to wonder about the accuracy of such questionnaire-based estimates. We present three studies that compared, head-to-head, questionnaire-based experiential frequencies with frequencies discovered using descriptive experience sampling (DES), a method for random sampling in the natural environment that aspires to apprehend inner experience with as high fidelity as the state of the art allows. Together, they suggest that estimates of inner-experience frequency produced by questionnaires and DES are irreconcilably discrepant: Questionnaire-based methods produced dramatically higher (from 2 to 4 times as high) frequencies than did DES. These results suggest caution when interpreting questionnaire-based experiential results and the importance of additional high-fidelity studies of inner experience.
内心言语、视觉图像、情感等等被理解为在“意识的聚光灯下”是可以直接领会的。许多心理学家认为内心体验的这些特征起着重要的理论作用,并且在广泛的认知、情感、表现和临床情境中具有应用意义。如果是这样,这些特征的出现频率至关重要。此类频率通常通过问卷调查或基于问卷的经验抽样来估计。然而,有理由怀疑这种基于问卷的估计的准确性。我们展示了三项研究,将基于问卷的体验频率与使用描述性经验抽样(DES)发现的频率进行了直接比较,DES是一种在自然环境中进行随机抽样的方法,旨在尽可能高保真地领会内心体验。综合来看,这些研究表明,问卷法和DES得出的内心体验频率估计结果存在不可调和的差异:基于问卷的方法得出的频率比DES高出很多(高出2到4倍)。这些结果表明,在解释基于问卷的体验结果时要谨慎,并且对内心体验进行额外的高保真研究非常重要。