Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits.

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1177/17470218241296090
Elif Bastan, Roberta McGuinness, Sarah R Beck, Andrew Dr Surtees
{"title":"Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits.","authors":"Elif Bastan, Roberta McGuinness, Sarah R Beck, Andrew Dr Surtees","doi":"10.1177/17470218241296090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Enhanced rationality has been linked to higher levels of autistic traits, characterised by increased deliberation and decreased intuition, alongside reduced susceptibility to common reasoning biases. However, it is unclear whether this is domain-specific or domain-general. We aimed to explore whether reasoning tendencies differ across social and non-social domains in relation to autistic traits. We conducted two experiments (<i>N</i><sup>1</sup> = 72, <i>N</i><sup>2</sup> = 217) using a reasoning task with social and non-social scenario comparisons to evaluate the specific information participants used when making judgments about children, in the social domain, and objects, in the non-social domain. We consistently found a greater reliance on behaviour-based information in the non-social domain, compared to the social domain, indicating a more deliberative approach. In Experiment 1, we found a correlation between autistic traits and the proportion of behaviour-based information, suggesting a more deliberative approach, when making judgments about children, and not about objects. In Experiment 2, with a larger sample, shortened version of the reasoning task, and requests for written justification, we did not identify a significant correlation between these variables. With this study, we introduce a novel scenario-based reasoning task that systematically compares the social and non-social domains. Our findings highlight the complex nature of the relationship between reasoning style and autistic traits.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"17470218241296090"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218241296090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Enhanced rationality has been linked to higher levels of autistic traits, characterised by increased deliberation and decreased intuition, alongside reduced susceptibility to common reasoning biases. However, it is unclear whether this is domain-specific or domain-general. We aimed to explore whether reasoning tendencies differ across social and non-social domains in relation to autistic traits. We conducted two experiments (N1 = 72, N2 = 217) using a reasoning task with social and non-social scenario comparisons to evaluate the specific information participants used when making judgments about children, in the social domain, and objects, in the non-social domain. We consistently found a greater reliance on behaviour-based information in the non-social domain, compared to the social domain, indicating a more deliberative approach. In Experiment 1, we found a correlation between autistic traits and the proportion of behaviour-based information, suggesting a more deliberative approach, when making judgments about children, and not about objects. In Experiment 2, with a larger sample, shortened version of the reasoning task, and requests for written justification, we did not identify a significant correlation between these variables. With this study, we introduce a novel scenario-based reasoning task that systematically compares the social and non-social domains. Our findings highlight the complex nature of the relationship between reasoning style and autistic traits.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
表达:社会领域与非社会领域的推理及其与自闭症特征的关系。
理性的增强与较高程度的自闭症特征有关,自闭症特征的特点是深思熟虑增加,直觉减少,同时对常见推理偏差的易感性降低。然而,目前还不清楚这是领域特异性还是领域一般性。我们旨在探索推理倾向在社会和非社会领域是否与自闭症特质有关。我们进行了两项实验(N1 = 72,N2 = 217),使用社会和非社会情景比较的推理任务来评估参与者在对社会领域的儿童和非社会领域的物体做出判断时所使用的特定信息。我们一致发现,与社会领域相比,非社会领域的参与者更依赖于基于行为的信息,这表明他们采用了一种更深思熟虑的方法。在实验 1 中,我们发现自闭症特质与基于行为的信息比例之间存在相关性,这表明在对儿童而非物体进行判断时,自闭症特质更倾向于深思熟虑的方法。在实验 2 中,我们使用了更多的样本、缩短了推理任务的版本,并要求提供书面理由,但并未发现这些变量之间存在显著的相关性。通过这项研究,我们引入了一项新颖的情景推理任务,系统地比较了社会领域和非社会领域。我们的研究结果凸显了推理风格与自闭症特征之间关系的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
期刊最新文献
Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits. When is a causal illusion an illusion? Separating discriminability and bias in human contingency judgements. Advancing an account of hierarchical dual-task control: A focused review on abstract higher-level task representations in dual-task situations. The effect of chronic academic stress on attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli. Is the precedence of social re-orienting only inherent to the initiators?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1