• 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

共变偏差与超自然信念。

Covariation bias and paranormal belief.

作者信息

Schienle A, Vaitl D, Stark R

机构信息

Department of Clinical and Physiological Psychology, University of Giessen, Germany.

出版信息

Psychol Rep. 1996 Feb;78(1):291-305. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1996.78.1.291.

DOI:10.2466/pr0.1996.78.1.291
PMID:8839320
Abstract

22 believers and 20 skeptics of extrasensory perception (ESP) participated in a telepathy experiment. Subjects were asked to judge the covariation between transmitted symbols and the corresponding feedback given by a receiver. Believers overestimated the number of successful transmissions ('hits'). Skeptics were characterized by accurate hit judgments. For believers, positive correlations between hit-responses, their heart rates, and their experienced arousal were found. In addition, subjective arousal was positively associated with the hit estimates given at the end of the experiment. This response pattern was absent in the group of skeptics. It is concluded that covariation bias as a psychophysiological concept plays an important role in the maintenance of paranormal belief.

摘要

22名超感官知觉(ESP)信徒和20名怀疑论者参与了一项心灵感应实验。受试者被要求判断传输的符号与接收者给出的相应反馈之间的协变关系。信徒高估了成功传输(“命中”)的次数。怀疑论者的特点是对命中的判断准确。对于信徒来说,命中反应、他们的心率和他们所体验到的唤醒之间存在正相关。此外,主观唤醒与实验结束时给出的命中估计呈正相关。在怀疑论者组中没有这种反应模式。得出的结论是,协变偏差作为一个心理生理概念,在超自然信念的维持中起着重要作用。

相似文献

1
Covariation bias and paranormal belief.共变偏差与超自然信念。
Psychol Rep. 1996 Feb;78(1):291-305. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1996.78.1.291.
2
Paranormal believers are more prone to illusory agency detection than skeptics.超自然信仰者比怀疑论者更容易产生虚幻的主体觉察。
Conscious Cogn. 2013 Sep;22(3):1041-6. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2013.07.004. Epub 2013 Aug 9.
3
Functional hemispheric asymmetry and belief in ESP: towards a "neuropsychology of belief".功能性半球不对称与超感官知觉信念:迈向“信念的神经心理学”
Percept Mot Skills. 1993 Dec;77(3 Pt 2):1299-308. doi: 10.2466/pms.1993.77.3f.1299.
4
Exploring the perceptual biases associated with believing and disbelieving in paranormal phenomena.探索与相信和不相信超自然现象相关的感知偏差。
Conscious Cogn. 2014 Aug;28:30-46. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.06.004. Epub 2014 Jul 16.
5
Sensitivity to coincidences and paranormal belief.对巧合的敏感性和对超自然现象的信仰。
Percept Mot Skills. 2011 Dec;113(3):894-908. doi: 10.2466/09.22.PMS.113.6.894-908.
6
Implicit learning of sequential bias in a guessing task: failure to demonstrate effects of dopamine administration and paranormal belief.猜测任务中序列偏差的内隐学习:未能证明多巴胺给药和超自然信念的影响。
Conscious Cogn. 2007 Jun;16(2):498-506. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2006.12.003. Epub 2007 Feb 27.
7
Associative processing and paranormal belief.联想加工与超自然信念。
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2001 Dec;55(6):595-603. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1819.2001.00911.x.
8
Sentences with core knowledge violations increase the size of N400 among paranormal believers.对于超自然现象信徒而言,包含核心知识违背内容的句子会增大N400的波幅。
Cortex. 2008 Nov-Dec;44(10):1307-15. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2007.07.010. Epub 2008 Jun 14.
9
Strong commitment to traditional Protestant religious beliefs is negatively related to beliefs in paranormal phenomena.对传统新教宗教信仰的强烈笃信与对超自然现象的信仰呈负相关。
Psychol Rep. 2000 Feb;86(1):183-9. doi: 10.2466/pr0.2000.86.1.183.
10
Paranormal psychic believers and skeptics: a large-scale test of the cognitive differences hypothesis.超自然通灵信仰者与怀疑论者:认知差异假说的大规模检验
Mem Cognit. 2016 Feb;44(2):242-61. doi: 10.3758/s13421-015-0563-x.

引用本文的文献

1
Paranormal beliefs and cognitive function: A systematic review and assessment of study quality across four decades of research.超自然信仰与认知功能:跨越四十年研究的系统综述与研究质量评估。
PLoS One. 2022 May 4;17(5):e0267360. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267360. eCollection 2022.
2
The Effect of Analytic Cognitive Style on Credulity.分析性认知风格对轻信的影响。
Front Psychol. 2020 Oct 15;11:584424. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.584424. eCollection 2020.