期刊文献+

演绎与归纳推理比较的神经机制:问题与趋势 被引量:2

The Neural Mechanisms of Comparison between Deductive and Inductive Reasoning: Problems and Trends
下载PDF
导出
摘要 演绎推理和归纳推理是两种主要形式的推理,单加工理论和双加工理论是推理心理学领域主要存在的两种相互竞争的理论。目前,已有多项研究采用认知神经科学技术来比较演绎推理和归纳推理,以检验推理是单加工过程还是双加工过程。但这些研究还面临诸多问题:正向推断逻辑的局限;不同的认知神经科学技术的差异;复杂多变的实验任务;以及认知神经科学本身所面临的质疑。未来的研究依然可以以正向推断为基本逻辑和突破口,采用多元的技术手段和规范的实验任务,对演绎和归纳推理比较的心理机制进行分子水平、神经元水平等更加微观化的研究。 Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are two main forms of reasoning. Single-process ac-counts and dual-process accounts are two competing theories of reasoning psychology. At present, many studies compare deductive and inductive reasoning using cognitive neuroscience technology to test whether reasoning is a single or double process. But there are many problems in the studies: limitations of forward inference, differences in cognitive neuroscience techniques, complex and varied experimental tasks, challenges of cognitive neuroscience itself and so on. In future research, forward inference can still be the basic logic and breakthrough of studies;multivariate techniques and standard experimental tasks should be conducted;and studies on the neural mechanisms of comparison between deductive and inductive reasoning should go deep into more microscopic level, such as the level of molecule and neuron.
出处 《心理学进展》 2016年第4期376-383,共8页 Advances in Psychology
基金 国家自然科学基金31200780资助。
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献24

  • 1YANG YanHui1,3,LIANG PeiPeng2,3,LU ShengFu2,3,LI KunCheng1,3 & ZHONG Ning2,3,4 1 Xuanwu Hospital,Capital Medical University,Beijing 100053,China,2 The International WIC Institute,Beijing University of Technology,Beijing 100124,China,3 Beijing Municipal Lab of Brain Informatics,Beijing 100124,China,4 Department of Life Science and Informatics,Maebashi Institute of Technology,Maebashi 371-0816,Japan.The role of the DLPFC in inductive reasoning of MCI patients and normal agings:An fMRI study[J].Science China(Life Sciences),2009,52(8):789-795. 被引量:6
  • 2李红,陈安涛,冯廷勇,李富洪,龙长权.个体归纳推理能力的发展及其机制研究展望[J].心理科学,2004,27(6):1457-1459. 被引量:30
  • 3Carey S. Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, 1985.
  • 4Choi, I, Nisbett, R E, Smith E E. Culture, category salience, and inductive reasoning. Cognition, 1997, 65 : 15 - 32.
  • 5Rips, L J. Inductive judgments about nalural calegories, journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 1975. 14:665- 681.
  • 6Osherson, D N, Smith E E, Wilkie O, Lopez A. Shafir E. Category - based Induction. Psychological Review. 1990, 97:185 - 200.
  • 7Sloman S A. Feature- based induction. Cognitive Psychology, 1993, 25 : 231 - 280.
  • 8Heir E. A Bayesian analysis of some forms of inductive reasoning. In: M Oaksford & N Chater ( Eds, ). Rational models of cognition. Oxford, UK : Oxford Univ. Press, 1998 : 248 - 274.
  • 9Nisbett R E, Krantz D H, Jepson C, Kunda Z. The use of statistical heuristics in everyday inductive reasoning. Psychological Review, 1983, 90:339- 363.
  • 10Heit E. Properties of inductive reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2000, 7 : 569 - 592.

共引文献31

同被引文献10

引证文献2

二级引证文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部