首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Springer Open Choice >Do confidence ratings prime confidence?
【2h】

Do confidence ratings prime confidence?

机译:置信度等级是主要信心吗?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Confidence ratings (CR) are one of the most frequently used measures in psychological research. However, recent evidence has suggested that eliciting CR from participants may result in changes to cognitive performance, so called reactivity. Here, we examine whether reactivity to CR can be better explained by added task-relevant introspection, or, alternatively, the unintentional priming of confidence-related beliefs. First, we compare participants’ performance in a group making CR with a group making a task-irrelevant control rating, and a second group who made the same task-irrelevant rating, but with the word ‘confident’ included in the rating’s wording. The results suggest that reactivity is driven by the presentation of the word ‘confident’, and reactivity does not require task-relevant introspection. Additionally, we show that rephrasing CR to remove the word ‘confident’ neutralises reactivity. This suggests that reactivity may represent a significant problem for researchers using CR, but rephrasing CR may remedy these concerns in relatively simple fashion.
机译:置信度(CR)是心理学研究中最常用的量度之一。但是,最近的证据表明,从参与者身上引出CR可能会导致认知能力的改变,即所谓的反应性。在这里,我们检查是否可以通过添加与任务相关的内省,或者无意识地引发与信任相关的信念,来更好地解释对CR的反应性。首先,我们比较参与者在做出CR的小组中的表现,与做出与任务无关的控制等级的小组,以及第二小组做出与任务无关的评级的小组,但等级措辞中包含“自信”一词。结果表明,反应性是由“自信”一词驱动的,反应性不需要与任务相关的内省。此外,我们证明,改写CR以删除“有信心”一词会中和反应性。这表明对于使用CR的研究人员来说,反应性可能是一个重大问题,但是改写CR可能以相对简单的方式解决这些问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号