Teaching reasoning.
Teaching reasoning.
复制标题
教学推理。
DOI：
10.1126/science.3672116
复制
发表时间：
1987
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Cheng,PW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nisbett,RE;Fong,GT;Lehman,DR;Cheng,PW
20世纪的心理学家一直对教授推理持悲观态度，普遍的观点认为，人们可能只拥有特定领域的规则，而不是抽象的规则；这意味着在一个领域中训练规则不会产生对其他领域的泛化。另一种观点认为，人们可能拥有抽象的规则（如逻辑规则），但这些规则是通过自我发现方法在发展过程中产生的，无法训练。研究提出了一种更为乐观的观点：即使是在推理规则方面的简短正式训练，也可能增强它们在推理日常生活事件方面的应用。以前的理论学家对可训练性的认识可能是错误的，部分原因是他们错误地识别了人们自然使用的那种规则。
Twentieth-century psychologists have been pessimistic about teaching reasoning, prevailing opinion suggesting that people may possess only domain-specific rules, rather than abstract rules; this would mean that training a rule in one domain would not produce generalization to other domains. Alternatively, it was thought that people might possess abstract rules (such as logical ones) but that these are induced developmentally through self-discovery methods and cannot be trained. Research suggests a much more optimistic view: even brief formal training in inferential rules may enhance their use for reasoning about everyday life events. Previous theorists may have been mistaken about trainability, in part because they misidentified the kind of rules that people use naturally.