实验重构减少了对解释表面细节的关注

Samuel Lau, Tricia J. Ngoon, Vineet Pandey, Scott R. Klemmer
{"title":"实验重构减少了对解释表面细节的关注","authors":"Samuel Lau, Tricia J. Ngoon, Vineet Pandey, Scott R. Klemmer","doi":"10.1145/3325480.3326582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Misunderstandings of science affect many lives. Novices commonly misunderstand explanations by overly relying on surface details instead of evaluating underlying logic. Prior work has found adding a patina of neuroscience leads readers towards positively assessing explanations. How might we help people better understand science explanations? A between-subjects experiment tested whether asking readers to reconstruct experiments leads them to focus more on underlying logic. Participants relied less on irrelevant surface details when reconstructing experiments. However, this did not impact their subsequent assessment of explanations. Our results suggest that reconstruction is a useful strategy for understanding explanations but is not readily transferred towards evaluating explanations.","PeriodicalId":415260,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Creativity and Cognition","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experiment Reconstruction Reduces Fixation on Surface Details of Explanations\",\"authors\":\"Samuel Lau, Tricia J. Ngoon, Vineet Pandey, Scott R. Klemmer\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3325480.3326582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Misunderstandings of science affect many lives. Novices commonly misunderstand explanations by overly relying on surface details instead of evaluating underlying logic. Prior work has found adding a patina of neuroscience leads readers towards positively assessing explanations. How might we help people better understand science explanations? A between-subjects experiment tested whether asking readers to reconstruct experiments leads them to focus more on underlying logic. Participants relied less on irrelevant surface details when reconstructing experiments. However, this did not impact their subsequent assessment of explanations. Our results suggest that reconstruction is a useful strategy for understanding explanations but is not readily transferred towards evaluating explanations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":415260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Creativity and Cognition\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Creativity and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3325480.3326582\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Creativity and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3325480.3326582","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

对科学的误解影响了许多人的生活。新手通常会过分依赖表面的细节,而不是评估潜在的逻辑,从而误解解释。先前的研究发现,加入神经科学的色彩会让读者对解释产生积极的评价。我们如何帮助人们更好地理解科学解释?一个被试之间的实验测试了让读者重构实验是否会让他们更关注潜在的逻辑。在重建实验时,参与者较少依赖无关的表面细节。然而,这并不影响他们随后对解释的评估。我们的研究结果表明,重建是一种理解解释的有用策略,但并不容易用于评估解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Experiment Reconstruction Reduces Fixation on Surface Details of Explanations
Misunderstandings of science affect many lives. Novices commonly misunderstand explanations by overly relying on surface details instead of evaluating underlying logic. Prior work has found adding a patina of neuroscience leads readers towards positively assessing explanations. How might we help people better understand science explanations? A between-subjects experiment tested whether asking readers to reconstruct experiments leads them to focus more on underlying logic. Participants relied less on irrelevant surface details when reconstructing experiments. However, this did not impact their subsequent assessment of explanations. Our results suggest that reconstruction is a useful strategy for understanding explanations but is not readily transferred towards evaluating explanations.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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