认知重塑:开放实验系统中的复杂动力学

Wendy Ross, F. Vallée‐Tourangeau
{"title":"认知重塑:开放实验系统中的复杂动力学","authors":"Wendy Ross, F. Vallée‐Tourangeau","doi":"10.36850/e4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Insight problems are sometimes designed to encourage an incorrect and misleading interpretation that veils a simple answer. The socks problem is one such problem: Given black socks and brown socks in a drawer mixed in a ratio of four to five, how many socks will you have to take out to make sure that you have a pair of the same color? The ratio information is misleading since, with only two colors, pulling three socks will guarantee a matching pair. Recently, offered a distinction between first- and second-order problem-solving: The former proceeds with and through a physical model of the problem, while the latter proceeds in the absence of such interactions with the world, in other words on the basis of mental processes alone. Vallée-Tourangeau and March also proposed a thought experiment, suggesting that the ratio information in the socks problem might be quickly abandoned in a first-order environment, that is, one where participants observe the results of drawing socks out of a bag rather than imagining themselves doing so. We tested this prediction by randomly allocating participants to a low- (second-order) or high- (first-order) interactivity condition. Marginally more participants announced the correct answer within a 5-minute period in the high than in the low condition, although the difference was not significant. Detailed analysis of the video recording revealed the challenges of operationalizing a second-order condition, as participants engaged in dialogical interactions with the experimenter. In addition, the manner in which the high-interactivity condition was designed appeared to encourage the physical reification of the misleading ratio, thus anchoring that information more firmly rather than defusing it through interactivity. We close the paper with some reflections on wide, or systemic, cognition in experimental research on creative problem-solving.","PeriodicalId":275817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Trial and Error","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rewilding Cognition: Complex Dynamics in Open Experimental Systems\",\"authors\":\"Wendy Ross, F. Vallée‐Tourangeau\",\"doi\":\"10.36850/e4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Insight problems are sometimes designed to encourage an incorrect and misleading interpretation that veils a simple answer. The socks problem is one such problem: Given black socks and brown socks in a drawer mixed in a ratio of four to five, how many socks will you have to take out to make sure that you have a pair of the same color? The ratio information is misleading since, with only two colors, pulling three socks will guarantee a matching pair. Recently, offered a distinction between first- and second-order problem-solving: The former proceeds with and through a physical model of the problem, while the latter proceeds in the absence of such interactions with the world, in other words on the basis of mental processes alone. Vallée-Tourangeau and March also proposed a thought experiment, suggesting that the ratio information in the socks problem might be quickly abandoned in a first-order environment, that is, one where participants observe the results of drawing socks out of a bag rather than imagining themselves doing so. We tested this prediction by randomly allocating participants to a low- (second-order) or high- (first-order) interactivity condition. Marginally more participants announced the correct answer within a 5-minute period in the high than in the low condition, although the difference was not significant. Detailed analysis of the video recording revealed the challenges of operationalizing a second-order condition, as participants engaged in dialogical interactions with the experimenter. In addition, the manner in which the high-interactivity condition was designed appeared to encourage the physical reification of the misleading ratio, thus anchoring that information more firmly rather than defusing it through interactivity. We close the paper with some reflections on wide, or systemic, cognition in experimental research on creative problem-solving.\",\"PeriodicalId\":275817,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Trial and Error\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Trial and Error\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36850/e4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Trial and Error","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36850/e4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

洞察力问题有时被设计成鼓励一个不正确和误导性的解释,掩盖了一个简单的答案。袜子问题就是这样一个问题:在一个抽屉里,黑色袜子和棕色袜子以四比五的比例混合在一起,你需要拿出多少只袜子才能确保你有一双相同颜色的袜子?比例信息是误导的,因为只有两种颜色,抽出三只袜子就一定能得到一双。最近,他提出了一阶和二阶问题解决之间的区别:前者通过问题的物理模型进行解决,而后者在没有这种与世界的互动的情况下进行,换句话说,仅基于心理过程。vallsame - tourangeau和March还提出了一个思想实验,表明袜子问题中的比例信息在一阶环境中可能很快就会被抛弃,也就是说,在一阶环境中,参与者观察从袋子里拿出袜子的结果,而不是想象自己这样做。我们通过将参与者随机分配到低(二阶)或高(一阶)交互条件来测试这一预测。在高条件下,在5分钟内宣布正确答案的参与者比在低条件下稍微多一些,尽管差异并不显著。对录像的详细分析揭示了当参与者与实验者进行对话互动时,操作二级条件的挑战。此外,高互动性条件的设计方式似乎鼓励了误导比例的物理具体化,从而更牢固地锚定了信息,而不是通过互动性来消除它。最后,我们对创造性问题解决实验研究中的广泛或系统认知进行了一些反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Rewilding Cognition: Complex Dynamics in Open Experimental Systems
Insight problems are sometimes designed to encourage an incorrect and misleading interpretation that veils a simple answer. The socks problem is one such problem: Given black socks and brown socks in a drawer mixed in a ratio of four to five, how many socks will you have to take out to make sure that you have a pair of the same color? The ratio information is misleading since, with only two colors, pulling three socks will guarantee a matching pair. Recently, offered a distinction between first- and second-order problem-solving: The former proceeds with and through a physical model of the problem, while the latter proceeds in the absence of such interactions with the world, in other words on the basis of mental processes alone. Vallée-Tourangeau and March also proposed a thought experiment, suggesting that the ratio information in the socks problem might be quickly abandoned in a first-order environment, that is, one where participants observe the results of drawing socks out of a bag rather than imagining themselves doing so. We tested this prediction by randomly allocating participants to a low- (second-order) or high- (first-order) interactivity condition. Marginally more participants announced the correct answer within a 5-minute period in the high than in the low condition, although the difference was not significant. Detailed analysis of the video recording revealed the challenges of operationalizing a second-order condition, as participants engaged in dialogical interactions with the experimenter. In addition, the manner in which the high-interactivity condition was designed appeared to encourage the physical reification of the misleading ratio, thus anchoring that information more firmly rather than defusing it through interactivity. We close the paper with some reflections on wide, or systemic, cognition in experimental research on creative problem-solving.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Serendipity in Scientific Research Three Persistent Myths about Open Science The Music Must Play On: The Music Therapy Sessions that Should not Have Stopped Medical Expert Endorsement Fails to Reduce Vaccine Hesitancy in U.K. Residents A Manifesto for Rewarding and Recognizing Team Infrastructure Roles
×
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