Ongchoco Joan Danielle K, Castiello Santiago, Corlett Philip R
Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
iScience. 2023 Aug 15;26(9):107643. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107643. eCollection 2023 Sep 15.
Teleological thought - the tendency to ascribe purpose to objects and events - is useful in some cases (encouraging explanation-seeking), but harmful in others (fueling delusions and conspiracy theories). What drives excessive and maladaptive teleological thinking? In causal learning, there is a fundamental distinction between associative learning versus learning via propositional mechanisms. Here, we propose that directly contrasting the contributions of these two pathways can elucidate the roots of excess teleology. We modified a causal learning task such that we could encourage associative versus propositional mechanisms in different instances. Across three experiments (total N = 600), teleological tendencies were correlated with delusion-like ideas and uniquely explained by aberrant learning, but not by learning via rules. Computational modeling suggested that the relationship between associative learning and teleological thinking can be explained by excessive prediction errors that imbue random events with more significance - providing a new understanding for how humans make meaning of lived events.
目的论思维——即赋予物体和事件以目的的倾向——在某些情况下是有用的(有助于激发寻求解释的行为),但在其他情况下则是有害的(助长错觉和阴谋论)。是什么导致了过度且适应不良的目的论思维?在因果学习中,联想学习与通过命题机制进行的学习之间存在根本区别。在此,我们提出直接对比这两种途径的作用能够阐明过度目的论的根源。我们修改了一个因果学习任务,以便在不同情况下分别促进联想机制和命题机制。在三项实验(总样本量N = 600)中,目的论倾向与类似错觉的观念相关,并且由异常学习唯一解释,而非通过规则学习来解释。计算模型表明,联想学习与目的论思维之间的关系可以通过过度的预测误差来解释,这些误差使随机事件具有了更大的意义——这为人类如何理解生活中的事件提供了新的认识。