心理模拟的资源界限:来自液体推理任务的证据。

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
YingQiao Wang, Tomer D Ullman
{"title":"心理模拟的资源界限:来自液体推理任务的证据。","authors":"YingQiao Wang, Tomer D Ullman","doi":"10.1037/xge0001792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People are able to reason about the physical dynamics of everyday objects. Bute there are theoretical disagreements about the computations that underlie this ability. One proposal is that people are running an approximate mental simulation of their environment. However, such a simulation must be limited in its resources. We applied the notion of a resource-bound simulation to a task of reasoning about liquids and showed that people's changing behavior can be explained by an approximate simulation that hits a resource limit after some time elapses. In Experiments 1 and 2, people performed well on tasks that asked them to estimate the time-to-fill and water level of different containers when filled over short periods of time (1-7 s). Experiment 3 shows systematic biases in visual volume estimation, which further strengthens the proposal that people are using a simulation to solve the first two experiments. Experiment 4 extends the reasoning time for the time-to-fill task and shows the existence of a \"switch point,\" as expected from a resource-bound simulation model. The model also accounts for individual differences: People who perform worse on a digit-span task have an earlier switch point. Our work argues for the theoretical proposal that people are using mental simulations to reason about intuitive physics but further informs the suggestion that these simulations are limited in resources. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resource bounds on mental simulations: Evidence from a liquid-reasoning task.\",\"authors\":\"YingQiao Wang, Tomer D Ullman\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xge0001792\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>People are able to reason about the physical dynamics of everyday objects. Bute there are theoretical disagreements about the computations that underlie this ability. One proposal is that people are running an approximate mental simulation of their environment. However, such a simulation must be limited in its resources. We applied the notion of a resource-bound simulation to a task of reasoning about liquids and showed that people's changing behavior can be explained by an approximate simulation that hits a resource limit after some time elapses. In Experiments 1 and 2, people performed well on tasks that asked them to estimate the time-to-fill and water level of different containers when filled over short periods of time (1-7 s). Experiment 3 shows systematic biases in visual volume estimation, which further strengthens the proposal that people are using a simulation to solve the first two experiments. Experiment 4 extends the reasoning time for the time-to-fill task and shows the existence of a \\\"switch point,\\\" as expected from a resource-bound simulation model. The model also accounts for individual differences: People who perform worse on a digit-span task have an earlier switch point. Our work argues for the theoretical proposal that people are using mental simulations to reason about intuitive physics but further informs the suggestion that these simulations are limited in resources. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001792\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001792","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们能够对日常物品的物理动力学进行推理。但是,关于这种能力背后的计算在理论上存在分歧。一种说法是,人们对周围环境进行了近似的心理模拟。然而,这种模拟的资源必须受到限制。我们将资源约束模拟的概念应用于一项关于液体的推理任务,并表明人们不断变化的行为可以通过一段时间后达到资源限制的近似模拟来解释。在实验1和2中,人们在要求他们在短时间内(1-7秒)估计不同容器的填充时间和水位的任务中表现良好。实验3显示了视觉体积估计的系统性偏差,这进一步加强了人们使用模拟来解决前两个实验的建议。实验4延长了填充时间任务的推理时间,并显示了“切换点”的存在,正如资源绑定模拟模型所期望的那样。该模型还解释了个体差异:在数字跨度任务中表现较差的人有较早的转换点。我们的工作支持人们使用心理模拟来推理直觉物理的理论建议,但进一步告知这些模拟在资源上是有限的。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resource bounds on mental simulations: Evidence from a liquid-reasoning task.

People are able to reason about the physical dynamics of everyday objects. Bute there are theoretical disagreements about the computations that underlie this ability. One proposal is that people are running an approximate mental simulation of their environment. However, such a simulation must be limited in its resources. We applied the notion of a resource-bound simulation to a task of reasoning about liquids and showed that people's changing behavior can be explained by an approximate simulation that hits a resource limit after some time elapses. In Experiments 1 and 2, people performed well on tasks that asked them to estimate the time-to-fill and water level of different containers when filled over short periods of time (1-7 s). Experiment 3 shows systematic biases in visual volume estimation, which further strengthens the proposal that people are using a simulation to solve the first two experiments. Experiment 4 extends the reasoning time for the time-to-fill task and shows the existence of a "switch point," as expected from a resource-bound simulation model. The model also accounts for individual differences: People who perform worse on a digit-span task have an earlier switch point. Our work argues for the theoretical proposal that people are using mental simulations to reason about intuitive physics but further informs the suggestion that these simulations are limited in resources. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

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
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信