{"title":"心算中的锚定偏差。","authors":"Samuel Shaki, Martin H Fischer","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-02035-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mental arithmetic is widely studied, both with symbolic digits and with non-symbolic dot patterns that require operand estimation. Several studies reported surprising biases in adults' performance with both formats while their direction (over/underestimation in addition/subtraction) remains controversial (operational momentum effect or OM; Prado & Knops, Prado and Knops, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, in Press., 2024). Theoretical accounts of OM make opposing predictions, thus enabling a decisive test: Using symbolic stimuli and responses, we enabled accurate operand encoding and result reporting, thus leaving mental calculation as only source of bias. Importantly, we manipulated operand order through calculation instructions (e.g., \"29 + 19\" vs. \"add 19 to 29\") to assess the crucial role of first operand size as cognitive anchor. With both auditory (Experiment 1, N = 30) and visual presentation (Experiment 2, N = 30), we observed reverse OM, i.e., overestimations in subtraction and underestimations in addition. Importantly, this instance of operation-based anchoring was independent of a second anchoring effect related to operand order: A large operand is a stronger anchor when mentioned first. Our discovery of both operation-based and order-based anchoring extends the well-known anchoring effect into mental arithmetic and eliminates several competing theories about the origin of OM.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":"89 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anchoring bias in mental arithmetic.\",\"authors\":\"Samuel Shaki, Martin H Fischer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00426-024-02035-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mental arithmetic is widely studied, both with symbolic digits and with non-symbolic dot patterns that require operand estimation. Several studies reported surprising biases in adults' performance with both formats while their direction (over/underestimation in addition/subtraction) remains controversial (operational momentum effect or OM; Prado & Knops, Prado and Knops, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, in Press., 2024). Theoretical accounts of OM make opposing predictions, thus enabling a decisive test: Using symbolic stimuli and responses, we enabled accurate operand encoding and result reporting, thus leaving mental calculation as only source of bias. Importantly, we manipulated operand order through calculation instructions (e.g., \\\"29 + 19\\\" vs. \\\"add 19 to 29\\\") to assess the crucial role of first operand size as cognitive anchor. With both auditory (Experiment 1, N = 30) and visual presentation (Experiment 2, N = 30), we observed reverse OM, i.e., overestimations in subtraction and underestimations in addition. Importantly, this instance of operation-based anchoring was independent of a second anchoring effect related to operand order: A large operand is a stronger anchor when mentioned first. Our discovery of both operation-based and order-based anchoring extends the well-known anchoring effect into mental arithmetic and eliminates several competing theories about the origin of OM.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"volume\":\"89 1\",\"pages\":\"27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02035-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02035-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Mental arithmetic is widely studied, both with symbolic digits and with non-symbolic dot patterns that require operand estimation. Several studies reported surprising biases in adults' performance with both formats while their direction (over/underestimation in addition/subtraction) remains controversial (operational momentum effect or OM; Prado & Knops, Prado and Knops, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, in Press., 2024). Theoretical accounts of OM make opposing predictions, thus enabling a decisive test: Using symbolic stimuli and responses, we enabled accurate operand encoding and result reporting, thus leaving mental calculation as only source of bias. Importantly, we manipulated operand order through calculation instructions (e.g., "29 + 19" vs. "add 19 to 29") to assess the crucial role of first operand size as cognitive anchor. With both auditory (Experiment 1, N = 30) and visual presentation (Experiment 2, N = 30), we observed reverse OM, i.e., overestimations in subtraction and underestimations in addition. Importantly, this instance of operation-based anchoring was independent of a second anchoring effect related to operand order: A large operand is a stronger anchor when mentioned first. Our discovery of both operation-based and order-based anchoring extends the well-known anchoring effect into mental arithmetic and eliminates several competing theories about the origin of OM.
期刊介绍:
Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.