扩展认知策略选择中的优先效应:初期速度优势大于后期速度优势。

IF 2.9 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Human Factors Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-23 DOI:10.1177/00187208231195747
Patrick P Weis, Wilfried Kunde
{"title":"扩展认知策略选择中的优先效应:初期速度优势大于后期速度优势。","authors":"Patrick P Weis, Wilfried Kunde","doi":"10.1177/00187208231195747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Human performers often recruit environment-based assistance to acquire or process information, such as relying on a smartphone app, a search engine, or a conversational agent. To make informed choices between several of such extended cognitive strategies, performers need to monitor the performance of these options.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In the present study, we investigated whether participants monitor an extended cognitive strategy's performance-here, speed-more closely during initial as compared to later encounters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In three experiments, 737 participants were asked to first observe speed differences between two competing cognitive strategies-here, two competing algorithms that can obtain answers to trivia questions-and eventually choose between both strategies based on the observations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants were sensitive to subtle speed differences and selected strategies accordingly. Most remarkably, even when participants performed identically with both strategies across <i>all</i> encounters, the strategy with superior speed in the <i>initial</i> encounters was preferred. Worded differently, participants exhibited a technology-use primacy effect. Contrarily, evidence for a recency effect was weak at best.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest that great care is required when performers are first acquainted with novel ways to acquire or process information. Superior initial performance has the potential to desensitize the performer for inferior later performance and thus prohibit optimal choice.</p><p><strong>Application: </strong>Awareness of primacy enables users and designers of extended cognitive strategies to actively remediate suboptimal behavior originating in early monitoring episodes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11089827/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primacy Effects in Extended Cognitive Strategy Choice: Initial Speed Benefits Outweigh Later Speed Benefits.\",\"authors\":\"Patrick P Weis, Wilfried Kunde\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187208231195747\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Human performers often recruit environment-based assistance to acquire or process information, such as relying on a smartphone app, a search engine, or a conversational agent. To make informed choices between several of such extended cognitive strategies, performers need to monitor the performance of these options.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>In the present study, we investigated whether participants monitor an extended cognitive strategy's performance-here, speed-more closely during initial as compared to later encounters.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In three experiments, 737 participants were asked to first observe speed differences between two competing cognitive strategies-here, two competing algorithms that can obtain answers to trivia questions-and eventually choose between both strategies based on the observations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants were sensitive to subtle speed differences and selected strategies accordingly. Most remarkably, even when participants performed identically with both strategies across <i>all</i> encounters, the strategy with superior speed in the <i>initial</i> encounters was preferred. Worded differently, participants exhibited a technology-use primacy effect. Contrarily, evidence for a recency effect was weak at best.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results suggest that great care is required when performers are first acquainted with novel ways to acquire or process information. Superior initial performance has the potential to desensitize the performer for inferior later performance and thus prohibit optimal choice.</p><p><strong>Application: </strong>Awareness of primacy enables users and designers of extended cognitive strategies to actively remediate suboptimal behavior originating in early monitoring episodes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Factors\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11089827/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231195747\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231195747","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:人类表演者经常需要环境辅助来获取或处理信息,例如依靠智能手机应用程序、搜索引擎或对话代理。为了在几种此类扩展认知策略之间做出明智的选择,表演者需要监控这些选项的表现:在本研究中,我们调查了参与者在最初接触时是否比后来接触时更密切地监控扩展认知策略的性能--这里指的是速度:在三项实验中,我们要求 737 名参与者首先观察两种相互竞争的认知策略之间的速度差异--这里是两种相互竞争的算法,它们都能获得琐事问题的答案--并最终根据观察结果在两种策略之间做出选择:结果:参与者对微妙的速度差异非常敏感,并据此选择策略。最值得注意的是,即使参与者在所有交锋中使用两种策略的表现完全相同,在最初交锋中速度更快的策略也更受青睐。换句话说,参与者表现出了技术使用优先效应。相反,追忆效应的证据充其量也很微弱:这些结果表明,当表演者初次接触获取或处理信息的新方法时,需要非常谨慎。结论:这些结果表明,当表演者第一次熟悉新的获取或处理信息的方式时,需要非常小心。最初的优异表现有可能使表演者对后来的低劣表现不再敏感,从而无法做出最佳选择:应用:对优先性的认识使扩展认知策略的使用者和设计者能够积极纠正源于早期监测事件的次优行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Primacy Effects in Extended Cognitive Strategy Choice: Initial Speed Benefits Outweigh Later Speed Benefits.

Background: Human performers often recruit environment-based assistance to acquire or process information, such as relying on a smartphone app, a search engine, or a conversational agent. To make informed choices between several of such extended cognitive strategies, performers need to monitor the performance of these options.

Objective: In the present study, we investigated whether participants monitor an extended cognitive strategy's performance-here, speed-more closely during initial as compared to later encounters.

Methods: In three experiments, 737 participants were asked to first observe speed differences between two competing cognitive strategies-here, two competing algorithms that can obtain answers to trivia questions-and eventually choose between both strategies based on the observations.

Results: Participants were sensitive to subtle speed differences and selected strategies accordingly. Most remarkably, even when participants performed identically with both strategies across all encounters, the strategy with superior speed in the initial encounters was preferred. Worded differently, participants exhibited a technology-use primacy effect. Contrarily, evidence for a recency effect was weak at best.

Conclusion: These results suggest that great care is required when performers are first acquainted with novel ways to acquire or process information. Superior initial performance has the potential to desensitize the performer for inferior later performance and thus prohibit optimal choice.

Application: Awareness of primacy enables users and designers of extended cognitive strategies to actively remediate suboptimal behavior originating in early monitoring episodes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信