为何2×2 = 5看起来如此错误：关于乘积验证中的奇偶规则 - Suppr

Suppr

超能文献

Why 2 X 2 = 5 looks so wrong: on the odd-even rule in product verification.

作者信息

Krueger L E

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 1986 Mar;14(2):141-9. doi: 10.3758/bf03198374.

DOI:10.3758/bf03198374

PMID:3724445

Abstract

摘要

相似文献

Why 2 X 2 = 5 looks so wrong: on the odd-even rule in product verification.为何2×2 = 5看起来如此错误：关于乘积验证中的奇偶规则

Mem Cognit. 1986 Mar;14(2):141-9. doi: 10.3758/bf03198374.

Why 2 + 2 = 5 looks so wrong: on the odd-even rule in sum verification.为何2+2=5看起来如此错误：关于求和验证中的奇偶规则。

Mem Cognit. 1984 Mar;12(2):171-80. doi: 10.3758/bf03198431.

The odd-even effect in multiplication: parity rule or familiarity with even numbers?乘法中的奇偶效应：奇偶规则还是对偶数的熟悉度？

Mem Cognit. 2000 Apr;28(3):358-65. doi: 10.3758/bf03198551.

When plausibility judgments supersede fact retrieval: the example of the odd-even effect on product verification.当合理性判断取代事实检索时：产品验证中奇偶效应的示例。

Mem Cognit. 1995 Jan;23(1):34-48. doi: 10.3758/bf03210555.

Evaluations of causal and conditional hypotheses.

Q J Exp Psychol A. 1986 Aug;38(3):493-512. doi: 10.1080/14640748608401610.

A cognitive maze.一个认知迷宫。

Percept Mot Skills. 1987 Oct;65(2):468-70. doi: 10.2466/pms.1987.65.2.468.

The access of relevant information for solving problems.获取解决问题的相关信息。

Mem Cognit. 1989 Sep;17(5):639-51. doi: 10.3758/bf03197086.

The role of salience in the extraction of algebraic rules.显著性在代数规则提取中的作用。

J Exp Psychol Gen. 2005 Aug;134(3):406-19. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.134.3.406.

When is an odd number not odd? Influence of task rule on the MARC effect for numeric classification.奇数在何时不是奇数？任务规则对数字分类的MARC效应的影响。

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Sep;33(5):832-42. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.5.832.

Alternative routes to perspective-taking: imagination and rule-use may be better than simulation and theorising.换位思考的替代途径：想象和规则运用可能比模拟和理论化更好。

Br J Dev Psychol. 2009 Sep;27(Pt 3):545-53; author reply 561-7. doi: 10.1348/026151008x400841.

引用本文的文献

Evidence for Automatic, Stimulus Driven, Arithmetic Processing of Single-digit Multiplication Problems.个位数乘法问题自动的、刺激驱动的算术处理的证据。

J Cogn. 2024 Jun 5;7(1):49. doi: 10.5334/joc.372. eCollection 2024.

When multiplying is meaningful in memory: Electrophysiological signature of the problem size effect in children.乘法在记忆中有意义：儿童问题大小效应的电生理特征。

J Exp Child Psychol. 2022 Jul;219:105399. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2022.105399. Epub 2022 Feb 26.

Do production and verification tasks in arithmetic rely on the same cognitive mechanisms? A test using alphabet arithmetic.在算术运算中，生产和验证任务是否依赖于相同的认知机制？一项使用字母算术的测试。

Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2021 Dec;74(12):2182-2192. doi: 10.1177/17470218211022635. Epub 2021 Jun 4.

When calculators lie: A demonstration of uncritical calculator usage among college students and factors that improve performance.当计算器说谎：大学生不批判地使用计算器的演示以及提高表现的因素。

PLoS One. 2019 Oct 30;14(10):e0223736. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223736. eCollection 2019.

Interference during the retrieval of arithmetic and lexico-semantic knowledge modulates similar brain regions: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).在提取算术和词汇语义知识的过程中存在干扰，会调节相似的大脑区域：来自功能磁共振成像（fMRI）的证据。

Cortex. 2019 Nov;120:375-393. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2019.06.007. Epub 2019 Jul 19.

Mem Cognit. 2016 Apr;44(3):444-53. doi: 10.3758/s13421-015-0566-7.

Strategy combination in human cognition: a behavioral and ERP study in arithmetic.人类认知中的策略组合：一项算术领域的行为与事件相关电位研究

Psychon Bull Rev. 2015 Feb;22(1):190-9. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0656-8.

Categorical and continuous--disentangling the neural correlates of the carry effect in multi-digit addition.类别和连续变量——在多位加法中分离进位效应的神经相关性。

Behav Brain Funct. 2010 Nov 20;6:70. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-6-70.

Neighborhood consistency in mental arithmetic: Behavioral and ERP evidence.心算中的邻里一致性：行为和 ERP 证据。

Behav Brain Funct. 2007 Dec 28;3:66. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-3-66.

Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: evidence from the SNARC effect.数字定量表征的空间结构：来自SNARC效应的证据。

Mem Cognit. 2004 Jun;32(4):662-73. doi: 10.3758/bf03195857.

本文引用的文献

Mental addition: a test of three verification models.心算：三种验证模型的一项测试。

Mem Cognit. 1981 Mar;9(2):185-96. doi: 10.3758/bf03202334.

Why 2 + 2 = 5 looks so wrong: on the odd-even rule in sum verification.为何2+2=5看起来如此错误：关于求和验证中的奇偶规则。

Mem Cognit. 1984 Mar;12(2):171-80. doi: 10.3758/bf03198431.

Cognitive arithmetic: comparison of operations.认知算术：运算比较

J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1984 Jan;10(1):46-60. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.10.1.46.

Time required for judgements of numerical inequality.判断数字不等式所需的时间。

Nature. 1967 Sep 30;215(5109):1519-20. doi: 10.1038/2151519a0.

A theory of perceptual matching.

Psychol Rev. 1978 Jul;85(4):278-304.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述，助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型，支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验