过度自信者元认知监控范围的实验研究
发布时间：2018-07-24 08:18
【摘要】：日常生活中,人们对自己的评价往往存在偏差,而过度自信就是其中一种最为典型的现象。由于过度自信的普遍存在,也引起了研究者们的关注。而对于过度自信的出现的原因,不同的学者有着不同的解释,例如,一些学者认为,过度自信之所以存在,在于过度自信者存在元认知的缺陷。他们认为,过度自信者面临着一种双重困境：他们不仅表现很差,而且不能意识到自己表现很差。最近的一些研究表明,过度自信者虽然存在着一定的元认知缺陷,但仍能从某种程度上意识到自己的不足。因此本研究想探讨过度自信者是否可以意识到自己的不足以及在多大范围内能够意识到。 预备实验采用问卷调查的方式,要求被试完成一份包括85道一般性知识问题的问卷。根据被试完成的实际情况,选出各20道一般性知识问题,作为两个正式实验的实验材料。对存在争议的任务难度也进行了控制,使其保持在中等难度水平。 正式实验中,被试首先回答20道一般性知识问题,接着对每一题的回答做出信心评价,预测自己的答对题数以及百分位排名,然后给予被试一次随机反馈,要求被试对反馈做出信心评价。其中,实验一采用了积极反馈和消极反馈两种形式,实验二则采用了四种更加具体的反馈形式：25%以下、25%50%之间、50%75%之间、75%以上,反馈水平由低到高。实验结果如下： 一、被试整体上表现出了过度自信,包括过高估计、过分精确和过高定位。被试倾向于相信反馈,反馈作用得到体现。 二、出现了Dunning-Kruger效应,即低表现者出现了过度自信,高表现者出现了轻微的低度自信。低表现者的预测成绩都显著低于高表现者,虽然低表现者出现了过度自信,但仍然认为自己的能力不会太高。 三、无论是高表现者还是低表现者,都倾向于相信积极反馈。但对于积极反馈,高表现者的信心评价显著高于低表现者；对于消极反馈,高表现者的信心评价却显著低于低表现者。说明高表现者的元认知水平更高,能在更大范围内监控自己的行为表现。 四、高表现者对反馈的信心评价随着反馈水平的上升而增加,低表现者对反馈的信心评价在一定范围内随着反馈水平的上升(从25%以下到50%75%之间)而增加,但随着反馈水平的进一步增加(75%以上),他们的信心评价出现了显著性下降。虽然低表现者存在着元认知的缺陷,但他们仍然能够在一定范围内监控自己的行为表现。 综上所述,本研究在以往研究基础上,证明了过度自信者可以意识到自己的不足,同时可以在一定范围内监控自己的行为表现。
[Abstract]:In daily life, people often have bias in their own evaluation, and overconfidence is one of the most typical phenomena. Due to the prevalence of overconfidence, researchers also pay attention to it. However, different scholars have different explanations for the emergence of overconfidence. For example, some scholars believe that overconfidence exists because of metacognitive defects. They argue that overconfident people face a double dilemma: not only do they perform poorly, but they don't realize they're doing badly. Recent studies have shown that overconfident people are aware of their shortcomings to some extent despite their metacognitive defects. Therefore, this study aims to explore whether and to what extent overconfident people are aware of their shortcomings. The preparatory experiment was conducted with a questionnaire, which included 85 general knowledge questions. According to the actual situation of the subjects, 20 general knowledge questions are selected as experimental materials for two formal experiments. The difficulty of the disputed task is also controlled to keep it at the medium level. In the formal experiment, the subjects first answered 20 general knowledge questions, then evaluated their confidence in the answers to each question, predicted their correct answers and percentile rankings, and then gave the participants a random feedback. Participants were asked to make a confidence assessment of the feedback. Among them, experiment one adopts positive feedback and negative feedback, and experiment two adopts four more specific feedback forms: 25% or less 25% or 50% or 75%, the feedback level is from low to high. The results are as follows: first, the subjects showed overconfidence, including overestimation, over-accuracy and over-positioning. Participants tend to believe in feedback, and feedback is reflected. Secondly, there is Dunning-Kruger effect, that is, the low performance person appears overconfidence, the high performance person appears the slight low confidence. The predicted results of the low performers were significantly lower than those of the high performers. Although the low performers had overconfidence, they still thought that their abilities were not too high. Third, both high and low performers tend to believe in positive feedback. But for positive feedback, the confidence evaluation of high performance is significantly higher than that of low performance, while for negative feedback, the confidence evaluation of high performance is significantly lower than that of low performance. It shows that the metacognition level of high performance is higher and can monitor their behavior in a wider range. Fourth, the confidence evaluation of high performance people to feedback increases with the increase of feedback level, and the confidence evaluation of low performance people increases with the increase of feedback level (from below 25% to 50%) in a certain range. However, with the further increase of feedback (more than 75%), their confidence evaluation decreased significantly. Although low-performance people have metacognitive defects, they can monitor their behavior to a certain extent. In conclusion, based on previous studies, this study proves that overconfident people can realize their shortcomings and monitor their behavior to a certain extent.
【学位授予单位】：陕西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B842.1
本文编号：2140783
[Abstract]:In daily life, people often have bias in their own evaluation, and overconfidence is one of the most typical phenomena. Due to the prevalence of overconfidence, researchers also pay attention to it. However, different scholars have different explanations for the emergence of overconfidence. For example, some scholars believe that overconfidence exists because of metacognitive defects. They argue that overconfident people face a double dilemma: not only do they perform poorly, but they don't realize they're doing badly. Recent studies have shown that overconfident people are aware of their shortcomings to some extent despite their metacognitive defects. Therefore, this study aims to explore whether and to what extent overconfident people are aware of their shortcomings. The preparatory experiment was conducted with a questionnaire, which included 85 general knowledge questions. According to the actual situation of the subjects, 20 general knowledge questions are selected as experimental materials for two formal experiments. The difficulty of the disputed task is also controlled to keep it at the medium level. In the formal experiment, the subjects first answered 20 general knowledge questions, then evaluated their confidence in the answers to each question, predicted their correct answers and percentile rankings, and then gave the participants a random feedback. Participants were asked to make a confidence assessment of the feedback. Among them, experiment one adopts positive feedback and negative feedback, and experiment two adopts four more specific feedback forms: 25% or less 25% or 50% or 75%, the feedback level is from low to high. The results are as follows: first, the subjects showed overconfidence, including overestimation, over-accuracy and over-positioning. Participants tend to believe in feedback, and feedback is reflected. Secondly, there is Dunning-Kruger effect, that is, the low performance person appears overconfidence, the high performance person appears the slight low confidence. The predicted results of the low performers were significantly lower than those of the high performers. Although the low performers had overconfidence, they still thought that their abilities were not too high. Third, both high and low performers tend to believe in positive feedback. But for positive feedback, the confidence evaluation of high performance is significantly higher than that of low performance, while for negative feedback, the confidence evaluation of high performance is significantly lower than that of low performance. It shows that the metacognition level of high performance is higher and can monitor their behavior in a wider range. Fourth, the confidence evaluation of high performance people to feedback increases with the increase of feedback level, and the confidence evaluation of low performance people increases with the increase of feedback level (from below 25% to 50%) in a certain range. However, with the further increase of feedback (more than 75%), their confidence evaluation decreased significantly. Although low-performance people have metacognitive defects, they can monitor their behavior to a certain extent. In conclusion, based on previous studies, this study proves that overconfident people can realize their shortcomings and monitor their behavior to a certain extent.
【学位授予单位】：陕西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：B842.1
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前1条
1 董奇;论元认知[J];北京师范大学学报;1989年01期
，本文编号：2140783
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/xinlixingwei/2140783.html
