中国水稻区与小麦区人群思维方式的比较研究

发布时间：2018-09-07 19:48

【摘要】：中西方思维方式的差异一直是跨文化心理学研究的热点。不同研究得出了基本一致的观点:西方文化人群偏重个体主义和分析性思维,东方文化人群倾向集体主义和整体性思维。在诸多解释东西方思维方式差异形成原因的理论中,“生存方式理论”影响最大。而Talhelm等人(2014)对用农业和牧业两种不同生存方式来解释东西思维方式差异提出了质疑,并且提出了解释差异的新角度——“水稻理论”。他们认为,种植小麦和种植水稻的不同才是东西方思维方式差异的主要生态基础。种植小麦造就了个体主义文化,小麦区人群倾向于分析性思维,而种植水稻造就了集体主义的文化,水稻区人群倾向于整体性思维。本研究从概念分类、概念表征、三段论推理和行为归因等方面比较了中国水稻区和小麦区人群的思维方式,对“水稻理论”进行了较为深入的检验。主要研究结果:1、在文字型和图片型概念分类任务中,在规则分类上,小麦区被试和水稻区被试在正确率和反应时上均无显著差异;在关系或相似性分类上,小麦区和水稻区在正确率和反应时上均无显著差异。2、在概念表征任务中,解决典型性概念表征时,水稻区被试和小麦区被试在正确率和反应时上均无显著差异,解决非典型性概念表征时,水稻区被试和小麦区被试在正确率和反应时上均无显著差异。3、小麦区和水稻区被试在三段论推理中都受信念偏差的影响,且不存在显著差异,均在不冲突推理上反应既快又准,在冲突推理上反应既慢又差。4、小麦区和水稻区被试在行为归因任务的表现无显著差异,他们都更倾向于个人或特质归因。本研究关于思维方式的测试任务,在概念分类任务、概念表征任务、三段论推理任务和行为归因任务测试上,水稻区和小麦区被试的反应并没有差异,结果不支持“水稻理论”的预测。论文从测试任务、被试取样和测试程序等方面对研究结果进行讨论,期望通过进一步提高测试任务的信度和效度、扩大抽样范围和改进研究程序等方面对“水稻理论”进行更有效的检验。
[Abstract]:The differences between Chinese and western thinking modes have always been the focus of cross-cultural psychology. Different studies have reached a basic consensus: the Western cultural group emphasizes individualism and analytical thinking, while the eastern cultural group tends to collectivism and holistic thinking. Among the theories that explain the differences in thinking styles between the East and the West, the "way of existence" theory has the greatest influence. Talhelm et al. (2014) questioned the differences in thinking modes between the east and the west by using two different ways of living in agriculture and animal husbandry, and put forward a new angle to explain the differences-"rice theory". They believe that the difference between wheat and rice is the main ecological basis for the differences in thinking patterns between the East and the West. The cultivation of wheat resulted in individualistic culture, the population in wheat area tended to think analytically, while the cultivation of rice brought up the culture of collectivism, and the population in rice area tended to think as a whole. This study compares the thinking patterns of Chinese rice and wheat populations in terms of conceptual classification, conceptual representation, syllogism reasoning and behavioral attribution, and makes a thorough test of "rice theory". The main result of this study was: 1. In the classification of text and picture concepts, there was no significant difference in the correct rate and reaction time between wheat and rice in regular classification, but in relation or similarity classification, there was no significant difference in correct rate and reaction time between wheat and rice regions. There was no significant difference in correct rate and response time between wheat and rice area. In the task of conceptual representation, there was no significant difference in correct rate and response time between rice and wheat area. There was no significant difference in correct rate and reaction time between rice and wheat area in solving atypical conceptual representation, but there was no significant difference between wheat region and rice region in syllogism reasoning, and there was no significant difference. The responses were fast and accurate in non-conflict reasoning, slow and poor in conflict reasoning. There was no significant difference in behavioral attribution tasks between wheat and rice regions, and they were more inclined to individual or trait attribution. In this study, there was no difference in the responses between rice and wheat subjects in the tasks of conceptual classification, conceptual representation, syllogism reasoning and behavioral attribution. The results do not support the prediction of rice theory. This paper discusses the research results from the aspects of test task, sample sampling and test procedure, and expects to further improve the reliability and validity of the test task. To test the rice theory more effectively by enlarging the sampling range and improving the research procedure.
【学位授予单位】：聊城大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B842.5

【相似文献】