Reasoning and Meta-Reasoning

推理和元推理

• 批准号: RGPIN-2018-04466
• 负责人: Thompson, Valerie
• 金额: $ 2.91万
• 依托单位: University of Saskatchewan
• 依托单位国家: 加拿大
• 项目类别: Discovery Grants Program - Individual
• 财政年份: 2020
• 资助国家: 加拿大
• 起止时间: 2020-01-01 至 2021-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/ase-oro/Details-Detailles_eng.asp?id=712927
• 关键词: Reasoning; Meta

Rely on instinct or think it through? The value of analytic thought has been hotly debated in both the popular and academic press. Some authors point to the accuracy of intuitions, while recent findings suggest that a tendency towards analytic thinking, as measured by the reasoning tasks used in this proposal, may have profound consequence outside of the laboratory in terms of susceptibility to fake news, eloquent but dubious claims, belief in the paranormal, etc. The proposed research aims to reshape our understanding of when and how analytic thinking is engaged by better understanding how our thought processes are monitored and how this monitoring shapes subsequent analytic engagement. The first set of studies takes a detailed look at the role of cognitive capacity in reasoning, the consequences of reasoning while distracted, and how reasoning strategies shape reasoning outcomes. The second investigates why, all other things being equal, analytic reasoning is not engaged in situations where it would be appropriate. The proposal is that many such instances arise from a metacognitive monitoring failure: the cues that we rely on to tell us that our thought processes are working well can be misleading. These cues give rise to a sense of certainty or uncertainty about how well a process has, is, or will, unfold. For example, intuitions are often accompanied by a strong feeling of rightness, which is our signal that further thought is not needed. Such feelings are based on cues, such as the ease with which things come to mind, that may not be well correlated with accuracy. Thus, a strong feeling of rightness may lead us to think all is well when it is not. The proposed research investigates the factors that determine the strength of this feeling of rightness in a variety of reasoning situations, as well as the relationship between this feeling of rightness and the probability and degree of more deliberate analysis. I have also proposed to examine other types of monitoring processes, such as the feeling of error (can we tell when we have made a mistake?), the feeling of wrongness (a sense that something is amiss), and judgments of solvability (am I capable of solving this problem?). The relevance of this work to a world where “fake news” and information overload abound is clear. In addition, students at all levels will gain experience with both the technical skills needed to carry out basic research, but also the team-work, communication, and problem-solving skills necessary to all professions in our competitive, modern world.

凭直觉还是深思熟虑？分析思维的价值在大众媒体和学术媒体上都有激烈的争论。一些作者指出了直觉的准确性，而最近的研究结果表明，通过本提案中使用的推理任务衡量的分析思维倾向，可能会在实验室以外的地方产生深远的后果，如对假新闻的敏感性、雄辩但可疑的说法、对超自然现象的信仰等。拟议的研究旨在通过更好地理解我们的思维过程是如何被监控的，以及这种监控是如何塑造后续分析参与的，从而重塑我们对分析思维何时以及如何参与的理解。第一组研究详细考察了认知能力在推理中的作用，分心时推理的后果，以及推理策略如何塑造推理结果。第二部分考察了为什么在其他条件相同的情况下，分析推理不适用于合适的情况。研究认为，许多这样的例子都是由元认知监控失败引起的：我们依赖的线索告诉我们，我们的思维过程运行良好，但这些线索可能具有误导性。这些线索给人一种关于一个过程已经、正在或将会展开得有多好的确定感或不确定性。例如，直觉往往伴随着一种强烈的正义感，这是我们不需要进一步思考的信号。这种感觉是建立在暗示的基础上的，比如脑海中浮现事物的容易程度，而这些暗示可能与准确性没有很好的相关性。因此，一种强烈的正义感可能会让我们认为一切都很好，而事实并非如此。这项拟议的研究调查了在各种推理情况下决定这种正当感强度的因素，以及这种正义感与更仔细分析的概率和程度之间的关系。我还建议检查其他类型的监控过程，例如错误感(当我们犯了错误时，我们能分辨出来吗？)、错误感(有问题的感觉)，以及对可解性的判断(我有能力解决这个问题吗？)这项工作对于一个“假新闻”和信息过载比比皆是的世界的意义是显而易见的。此外，所有级别的学生都将获得开展基础研究所需的技术技能，以及在竞争激烈的现代世界中所有职业所必需的团队合作、沟通和解决问题的技能。