• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

认知上的怪癖解释了为什么我们会极大地高估少数群体的规模。

Quirks of cognition explain why we dramatically overestimate the size of minority groups.

作者信息

Guay Brian, Marghetis Tyler, Wong Cara, Landy David

机构信息

Department of Political Science, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794.

Department of Cognitive and Information Sciences, University of California, Merced, CA 95343.

出版信息

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Apr 8;122(14):e2413064122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2413064122. Epub 2025 Mar 31.

DOI:10.1073/pnas.2413064122
PMID:40163733
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12002232/
Abstract

Americans dramatically overestimate the size of African American, Latino, Muslim, Asian, Jewish, immigrant, and LGBTQ populations, leading to concerns about downstream racial attitudes and policy preferences. Such errors are common whenever the public is asked to estimate proportions relevant to political issues, from refugee crises and polarization to climate change and COVID-19. Researchers across the social sciences interpret these errors as evidence of widespread misinformation that is topic-specific and potentially harmful. Here, we show that researchers and journalists have misinterpreted the origins and meaning of these misestimates by overlooking systematic distortions introduced by the domain-general psychological processes involved in estimating proportions under uncertainty. In general, people systematically rescale estimates of proportions toward more central prior expectations, resulting in the consistent overestimation of smaller groups and underestimation of larger groups. We formalize this process and show that it explains much of the systematic error in estimates of demographic groups ([Formula: see text] estimates from 22 countries). This domain-general account far outperforms longstanding group-specific explanations (e.g., biases toward specific groups). We find, moreover, that people make the same errors when estimating the size of racial, nonracial, and entirely nonpolitical groups, such as the proportion of Americans who have a valid passport or own a washing machine. Our results call for researchers, journalists, and pundits alike to reconsider how to interpret misperceptions about the demographic structure of society.

摘要

美国人极大地高估了非裔美国人、拉丁裔、穆斯林、亚裔、犹太裔、移民以及 LGBTQ 群体的规模,这引发了对下游种族态度和政策偏好的担忧。每当要求公众估计与政治问题相关的比例时,比如从难民危机、两极分化到气候变化和 COVID - 19 等问题,这类错误都很常见。社会科学领域的研究人员将这些错误解读为广泛存在的错误信息的证据,这些错误信息具有特定主题且可能有害。在此,我们表明研究人员和记者误解了这些错误估计的起源和含义,因为他们忽视了在不确定性情况下估计比例时涉及的通用心理过程所引入的系统性扭曲。一般来说,人们会将比例估计系统性地重新调整为更接近核心的先验预期,导致持续高估较小群体而低估较大群体。我们将这一过程形式化,并表明它解释了人口群体估计中大部分的系统性误差(来自 22 个国家的[公式:见正文]估计)。这种通用解释远优于长期以来针对特定群体的解释(例如对特定群体的偏见)。此外,我们发现人们在估计种族、非种族以及完全非政治群体的规模时也会犯同样的错误,比如拥有有效护照或拥有洗衣机的美国人的比例。我们的研究结果呼吁研究人员、记者和专家等重新思考如何解读对社会人口结构的误解。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/837ef9de2120/pnas.2413064122fig07.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/0f73398a3b95/pnas.2413064122fig01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/6329a53fa738/pnas.2413064122fig02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/e3355506844c/pnas.2413064122fig03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/b0cdb9d132c2/pnas.2413064122fig04.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/f12baa22886f/pnas.2413064122fig05.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/be860b9d8911/pnas.2413064122fig06.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/837ef9de2120/pnas.2413064122fig07.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/0f73398a3b95/pnas.2413064122fig01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/6329a53fa738/pnas.2413064122fig02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/e3355506844c/pnas.2413064122fig03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/b0cdb9d132c2/pnas.2413064122fig04.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/f12baa22886f/pnas.2413064122fig05.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/be860b9d8911/pnas.2413064122fig06.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9bed/12002232/837ef9de2120/pnas.2413064122fig07.jpg

相似文献

1
Quirks of cognition explain why we dramatically overestimate the size of minority groups.认知上的怪癖解释了为什么我们会极大地高估少数群体的规模。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Apr 8;122(14):e2413064122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2413064122. Epub 2025 Mar 31.
2
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
3
Bias and ignorance in demographic perception.人口观念的偏见与无知。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Oct;25(5):1606-1618. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1360-2.
4
Racial and cultural minority experiences and perceptions of health care provision in a mid-western region.中西部地区少数民族的医疗服务体验和看法。
Int J Equity Health. 2018 Mar 16;17(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12939-018-0744-x.
5
Palliative care experiences of adult cancer patients from ethnocultural groups: a qualitative systematic review protocol.不同种族文化群体成年癌症患者的姑息治疗体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):99-111. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1809.
6
Counties with High COVID-19 Incidence and Relatively Large Racial and Ethnic Minority Populations - United States, April 1-December 22, 2020.高 COVID-19 发病率和相对较大的少数族裔人口的县-美国,2020 年 4 月 1 日至 12 月 22 日。
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2021 Apr 2;70(13):483-489. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7013e1.
7
Is Our Science Representative? A Systematic Review of Racial and Ethnic Diversity in Orthopaedic Clinical Trials from 2000 to 2020.我们的科学具有代表性吗?一项针对 2000 年至 2020 年骨科临床试验中种族和民族多样性的系统评价。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 May 1;480(5):848-858. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002050. Epub 2021 Dec 2.
8
Racial/Ethnic Differences in Expectations Regarding Aging Among Older Adults.老年人对衰老的期望存在种族/民族差异。
Gerontologist. 2017 Aug 1;57(suppl_2):S138-S148. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnx078.
9
Racial and Ethnic Digital Divides in Posting COVID-19 Content on Social Media Among US Adults: Secondary Survey Analysis.美国成年人在社交媒体上发布新冠疫情相关内容时的种族和族裔数字鸿沟:二次调查分析
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jul 3;22(7):e20472. doi: 10.2196/20472.
10
Perceived discrimination, categorization threat, and Dominican Americans' attitudes toward African Americans.感知歧视、分类威胁与多米尼加裔美国人对非裔美国人的态度
Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2019 Oct;25(4):604-610. doi: 10.1037/cdp0000275. Epub 2019 Feb 28.

本文引用的文献

1
Misperceptions about out-partisans' democratic values may erode democracy.对外派人员民主价值观的误解可能会侵蚀民主。
Sci Rep. 2022 Sep 29;12(1):16284. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-19616-4.
2
Americans experience a false social reality by underestimating popular climate policy support by nearly half.美国人低估了民众对气候政策的支持率,近一半人都生活在这种错误的社会现实中。
Nat Commun. 2022 Aug 23;13(1):4779. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-32412-y.
3
Homophily and minority-group size explain perception biases in social networks.同质性和少数群体规模解释了社交网络中的感知偏差。
Nat Hum Behav. 2019 Oct;3(10):1078-1087. doi: 10.1038/s41562-019-0677-4. Epub 2019 Aug 12.
4
Bias and ignorance in demographic perception.人口观念的偏见与无知。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Oct;25(5):1606-1618. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1360-2.
5
The development of numerical estimation: evidence against a representational shift.数值估计的发展:反对表示性转变的证据。
Dev Sci. 2011 Jan;14(1):125-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00962.x.
6
ABSOLUTE JUDGMENTS OF DISCRETE QUANTITIES RANDOMLY DISTRIBUTED OVER TIME.对随时间随机分布的离散量的绝对判断。
J Exp Psychol. 1964 May;67:475-82. doi: 10.1037/h0042698.
7
On the psychophysical law.论心理物理学定律。
Psychol Rev. 1957 May;64(3):153-81. doi: 10.1037/h0046162.
8
The neural basis of the Weber-Fechner law: a logarithmic mental number line.韦伯-费希纳定律的神经基础:对数心理数轴
Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Apr;7(4):145-147. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(03)00055-x.
9
Innumeracy about Minority Populations: African Americans and Whites Compared.少数族裔人口的数字盲:非裔美国人和白人的比较
Public Opin Q. 2001 Spring;65(1):86-94.
10
Bias in proportion judgments: the cyclical power model.比例判断中的偏差:循环幂模型
Psychol Rev. 2000 Jul;107(3):500-24. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.107.3.500.