滥交目的论与控制点的影响

R. Mills, Jason N. Frowley
{"title":"滥交目的论与控制点的影响","authors":"R. Mills, Jason N. Frowley","doi":"10.1080/03033910.2015.1011192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research conducted in the USA suggests that adults possess a bias towards teleological – or purpose-based – explanations of natural objects and phenomena, known as Promiscuous Teleology (PT). This study aimed to investigate PT using an Irish sample. Participants judged a series of statements about why different natural phenomena occur as correct/incorrect. There were two experimental conditions where participants responded under speeded conditions, and a control condition where participants were not pressured. A multivariate analysis of variance revealed that participants in the experimental conditions judged significantly more scientifically unwarranted teleological explanations (e.g., ‘The sun makes light so that plants can photosynthesise’) correct than participants in the control condition. Significantly, participants were not more error-prone on control item explanations (e.g., ‘Polar bears are white because the sun bleaches them’, an unwarranted physical-causal explanation) in experimental condition...","PeriodicalId":91174,"journal":{"name":"The Irish journal of psychology","volume":"35 1","pages":"121-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03033910.2015.1011192","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Promiscuous Teleology and the effect of Locus of Control\",\"authors\":\"R. Mills, Jason N. Frowley\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03033910.2015.1011192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research conducted in the USA suggests that adults possess a bias towards teleological – or purpose-based – explanations of natural objects and phenomena, known as Promiscuous Teleology (PT). This study aimed to investigate PT using an Irish sample. Participants judged a series of statements about why different natural phenomena occur as correct/incorrect. There were two experimental conditions where participants responded under speeded conditions, and a control condition where participants were not pressured. A multivariate analysis of variance revealed that participants in the experimental conditions judged significantly more scientifically unwarranted teleological explanations (e.g., ‘The sun makes light so that plants can photosynthesise’) correct than participants in the control condition. Significantly, participants were not more error-prone on control item explanations (e.g., ‘Polar bears are white because the sun bleaches them’, an unwarranted physical-causal explanation) in experimental condition...\",\"PeriodicalId\":91174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Irish journal of psychology\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"121-132\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03033910.2015.1011192\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Irish journal of psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03033910.2015.1011192\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Irish journal of psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03033910.2015.1011192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

在美国进行的一项研究表明,成年人对自然物体和现象的目的论或基于目的的解释存在偏见,这被称为混淆目的论(PT)。本研究旨在调查PT使用爱尔兰样本。参与者判断一系列关于不同自然现象发生的原因的陈述是否正确。在两种实验条件下,参与者在快速条件下做出反应,在没有压力的情况下进行控制。方差的多变量分析显示,实验条件下的参与者对科学上没有根据的目的论解释(例如,“太阳发光使植物能够进行光合作用”)的判断比控制条件下的参与者要正确得多。值得注意的是,在实验条件下,参与者对控制项目的解释(例如,“北极熊是白色的,因为太阳把它们漂白了”,一个没有根据的物理因果解释)并不更容易出错……
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
Promiscuous Teleology and the effect of Locus of Control
Research conducted in the USA suggests that adults possess a bias towards teleological – or purpose-based – explanations of natural objects and phenomena, known as Promiscuous Teleology (PT). This study aimed to investigate PT using an Irish sample. Participants judged a series of statements about why different natural phenomena occur as correct/incorrect. There were two experimental conditions where participants responded under speeded conditions, and a control condition where participants were not pressured. A multivariate analysis of variance revealed that participants in the experimental conditions judged significantly more scientifically unwarranted teleological explanations (e.g., ‘The sun makes light so that plants can photosynthesise’) correct than participants in the control condition. Significantly, participants were not more error-prone on control item explanations (e.g., ‘Polar bears are white because the sun bleaches them’, an unwarranted physical-causal explanation) in experimental condition...
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
Prospective Evaluation of Hearing Status in Neonatal Hyperbilirubinemia. Service users’ experiences of life supported by an Irish mental health service still battling with implementing recovery-orientated principles Teenage parenthood and child externalising and internalising problems: evidence from the ‘Growing Up in Ireland’ study Predictive role of risk and protective factors before and after suicide intervention therapy Elite athlete receptivity to sport psychology consulting in Ireland
×
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