Suppr超能文献

过度的目的论思维是由异常联想驱动的,而非推理失误所致。

Excessive teleological thinking is driven by aberrant associations and not by failure of reasoning.

作者信息

Ongchoco Joan Danielle K, Castiello Santiago, Corlett Philip R

机构信息

Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.

出版信息

iScience. 2023 Aug 15;26(9):107643. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107643. eCollection 2023 Sep 15.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7dbe/10495659/897b04d058ca/fx1.jpg

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