首页> 外文期刊>Cognition: International Journal of Cognitive Psychology >Disfluency prompts analytic thinking-But not always greater accuracy: Response to Thompson et al. (2013)
【24h】

Disfluency prompts analytic thinking-But not always greater accuracy: Response to Thompson et al. (2013)

机译:不满促使分析性思维-但并非总是如此,准确性更高:对汤普森等人的回应。 (2013年)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In this issue of Cognition, Thompson and her colleagues challenge the results from a paper we published several years ago (Alter, Oppenheimer, Epley, & Eyre, 2007). That paper demonstrated that metacognitive difficulty or disfluency can trigger more analytical thinking as measured by accuracy on several reasoning tasks. In their experiments, Thompson et al. find evidence that people process information more deeply-but not necessarily more accurately-when they experience disfluency. These results are consistent with our original theorizing, but the authors misinterpret it as counter-evidence because they suggest that accuracy (and even confidence) is a measure of deeper processing rather than a contingent outcome of such processing. We further suggest that Thompson et al. err when they discriminate between ''perceptual fluency'' and ''answer fluency,'' the former of which is an element of the latter. Thompson et al. advance research by adding reaction time as a measure of deeper cognitive processing, but we caution against misinterpreting the meaning of accuracy.
机译:在本期《认知》中,汤普森和她的同事们挑战了我们几年前发表的一篇论文的结果(Alter,Oppenheimer,Epley和Eyre,2007年)。该论文证明,通过对几个推理任务的准确性进行衡量,元认知的困难或困惑可以引发更多的分析性思维。在他们的实验中,汤普森等人。找到证据表明人们在感到不满时会更深入地处理信息,但不一定更准确。这些结果与我们最初的理论是一致的,但是作者误认为它是反证据,因为他们认为准确性(甚至信心)是对更深层次处理的一种衡量,而不是这种处理的偶然结果。我们进一步建议汤普森等。当他们在“感知流利度”和“答案流利度”之间进行区分时会犯错,前者是后者的要素。汤普森等。通过增加反应时间来进行更深入的认知处理,从而提高研究水平,但是我们提醒您不要误解准确性的含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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