无知不是福关于衡量对次优刺激的认识问题

IF 1.2 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
David S. March
{"title":"无知不是福关于衡量对次优刺激的认识问题","authors":"David S. March","doi":"10.1521/soco.2024.42.1.27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is standard practice to assess participants’ perception of suboptimal stimuli by using an awareness measure. Yet the assessment of stimulus awareness is a difficult issue in masked priming studies; there is no standard for what constitutes participants’ conscious “awareness” nor what measure is best to assess awareness. Nonetheless, researchers make claims of participant (un)awareness based on idiosyncratic operationalizations of “awareness” and unstandardized practices for testing awareness. This unstandardized practice can lead to spurious conclusions based on faulty assumptions. The current work adds to an ongoing discussion on the methodology of the field by drawing attention to how operational definitions and tasks impact the results obtained from experiments. The concept of awareness is briefly discussed, work testing awareness across three attempts is presented, each using different oft-employed awareness measures that render different empirical conclusions, and finally the article discusses choosing an awareness measure that reflects one's research goal.","PeriodicalId":48050,"journal":{"name":"Social Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ignorance Is Not Bliss: On Issues Measuring the Awareness of Suboptimal Stimuli\",\"authors\":\"David S. March\",\"doi\":\"10.1521/soco.2024.42.1.27\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is standard practice to assess participants’ perception of suboptimal stimuli by using an awareness measure. Yet the assessment of stimulus awareness is a difficult issue in masked priming studies; there is no standard for what constitutes participants’ conscious “awareness” nor what measure is best to assess awareness. Nonetheless, researchers make claims of participant (un)awareness based on idiosyncratic operationalizations of “awareness” and unstandardized practices for testing awareness. This unstandardized practice can lead to spurious conclusions based on faulty assumptions. The current work adds to an ongoing discussion on the methodology of the field by drawing attention to how operational definitions and tasks impact the results obtained from experiments. The concept of awareness is briefly discussed, work testing awareness across three attempts is presented, each using different oft-employed awareness measures that render different empirical conclusions, and finally the article discusses choosing an awareness measure that reflects one's research goal.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Cognition\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2024.42.1.27\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2024.42.1.27","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

标准的做法是使用意识测量来评估参与者对次优刺激的感知。然而,在掩蔽引物研究中,对刺激感知的评估是一个棘手的问题;什么是参与者有意识的 "感知",什么是评估感知的最佳方法,这些都没有标准可循。尽管如此,研究人员还是会根据 "意识 "的特异性操作方法和测试意识的非标准化做法来声称被试(未)意识到。这种非标准化的做法可能会导致基于错误假设的虚假结论。当前的研究通过提请人们注意操作定义和任务如何影响实验结果,为正在进行的关于该领域方法论的讨论增添了新的内容。文章简要讨论了意识的概念,介绍了在三次尝试中测试意识的工作,每次尝试都使用了不同的常用意识测量方法,从而得出了不同的实证结论,最后文章讨论了如何选择一种能反映研究目标的意识测量方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ignorance Is Not Bliss: On Issues Measuring the Awareness of Suboptimal Stimuli
It is standard practice to assess participants’ perception of suboptimal stimuli by using an awareness measure. Yet the assessment of stimulus awareness is a difficult issue in masked priming studies; there is no standard for what constitutes participants’ conscious “awareness” nor what measure is best to assess awareness. Nonetheless, researchers make claims of participant (un)awareness based on idiosyncratic operationalizations of “awareness” and unstandardized practices for testing awareness. This unstandardized practice can lead to spurious conclusions based on faulty assumptions. The current work adds to an ongoing discussion on the methodology of the field by drawing attention to how operational definitions and tasks impact the results obtained from experiments. The concept of awareness is briefly discussed, work testing awareness across three attempts is presented, each using different oft-employed awareness measures that render different empirical conclusions, and finally the article discusses choosing an awareness measure that reflects one's research goal.
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
Social Cognition
Social Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: An excellent resource for researchers as well as students, Social Cognition features reports on empirical research, self-perception, self-concept, social neuroscience, person-memory integration, social schemata, the development of social cognition, and the role of affect in memory and perception. Three broad concerns define the scope of the journal: - The processes underlying the perception, memory, and judgment of social stimuli - The effects of social, cultural, and affective factors on the processing of information The behavioral and interpersonal consequences of cognitive processes.
×
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