用句子验证判断来检验轻信。

IF 1.9 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of General Psychology Pub Date : 2024-06-08 DOI:10.1080/00221309.2024.2360401
Yasuhiro Ozuru, Masoumeh Heidari
{"title":"用句子验证判断来检验轻信。","authors":"Yasuhiro Ozuru, Masoumeh Heidari","doi":"10.1080/00221309.2024.2360401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Three experiments were conducted to examine gullibility as measured by people's bias to respond with a True response when performing sentence verification judgment task. The experiments manipulated the location of unfamiliar concepts such that some sentences contained unfamiliar concepts in the subject while other sentences contained unfamiliar concepts in the predicate, hence measuring the bias to judge an idea to be true when one cannot make the decision relying on background knowledge. The results indicated: 1) a higher frequency of True response when an unfamiliar concept is located in the subject compared to when it is in the predicate; and 2) the frequency of True response was lower than chance level even when unfamiliar information is located in the subject. The results were discussed in relation to gullibility and how the verification judgment is processed as a plausibility judgment.</p>","PeriodicalId":47581,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining gullibility with sentence verification judgments.\",\"authors\":\"Yasuhiro Ozuru, Masoumeh Heidari\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00221309.2024.2360401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Three experiments were conducted to examine gullibility as measured by people's bias to respond with a True response when performing sentence verification judgment task. The experiments manipulated the location of unfamiliar concepts such that some sentences contained unfamiliar concepts in the subject while other sentences contained unfamiliar concepts in the predicate, hence measuring the bias to judge an idea to be true when one cannot make the decision relying on background knowledge. The results indicated: 1) a higher frequency of True response when an unfamiliar concept is located in the subject compared to when it is in the predicate; and 2) the frequency of True response was lower than chance level even when unfamiliar information is located in the subject. The results were discussed in relation to gullibility and how the verification judgment is processed as a plausibility judgment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47581,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of General Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of General Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2024.2360401\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2024.2360401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们进行了三项实验来研究人们在完成句子验证判断任务时的 "轻信 "倾向。这些实验操纵了陌生概念的位置,使一些句子的主语中包含陌生概念,而另一些句子的谓语中包含陌生概念,从而测量了当一个人无法依靠背景知识做出判断时,判断一个观点为真的偏差。结果表明1)与谓语中的陌生概念相比,当陌生概念位于主语中时,"真 "的反应频率更高;2)即使陌生信息位于主语中,"真 "的反应频率也低于偶然水平。这些结果与轻信以及如何将验证判断作为可信度判断来处理进行了讨论。
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
Examining gullibility with sentence verification judgments.

Three experiments were conducted to examine gullibility as measured by people's bias to respond with a True response when performing sentence verification judgment task. The experiments manipulated the location of unfamiliar concepts such that some sentences contained unfamiliar concepts in the subject while other sentences contained unfamiliar concepts in the predicate, hence measuring the bias to judge an idea to be true when one cannot make the decision relying on background knowledge. The results indicated: 1) a higher frequency of True response when an unfamiliar concept is located in the subject compared to when it is in the predicate; and 2) the frequency of True response was lower than chance level even when unfamiliar information is located in the subject. The results were discussed in relation to gullibility and how the verification judgment is processed as a plausibility judgment.

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
Journal of General Psychology
Journal of General Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Journal of General Psychology publishes human and animal research reflecting various methodological approaches in all areas of experimental psychology. It covers traditional topics such as physiological and comparative psychology, sensation, perception, learning, and motivation, as well as more diverse topics such as cognition, memory, language, aging, and substance abuse, or mathematical, statistical, methodological, and other theoretical investigations. The journal especially features studies that establish functional relationships, involve a series of integrated experiments, or contribute to the development of new theoretical insights or practical applications.
期刊最新文献
Self-focused autonomy, other-focused pro-sociality, and well-being: a cross-national cluster analysis. Age differences in the recruitment of syntactic analysis and semantic plausibility during sentence comprehension. Don't worry, they get the idea: instructions have no impact on dehumanization ratings on the Ascent of Human Scale. Causality orientations and spontaneous mental contrasting. Roles of expressed gratitude and apologies in predicting reciprocal responsiveness.
×
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