如果我走平常的路线就好了……:与年龄相关的反事实思维差异。

Michelle Horhota, Andrew Mienaltowski, Fredda Blanchard-Fields
{"title":"如果我走平常的路线就好了……:与年龄相关的反事实思维差异。","authors":"Michelle Horhota,&nbsp;Andrew Mienaltowski,&nbsp;Fredda Blanchard-Fields","doi":"10.1080/13825585.2011.615904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous research suggests that young adults can shift between rational and experiential modes of thinking when forming social judgments. The present study examines whether older adults demonstrate this flexibility in thinking. Young and older adults completed an If-only task adapted from Epstein, Lipson, and Huh's (1992 , Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 328) examination of individuals' ability to adopt rational or experiential modes of thought while making a judgment about characters who experience a negative event that could have been avoided. Consistent with our expectations for their judgments of the characters, young adults shifted between experiential and rational modes of thought when instructed to do so. Conversely, regardless of the mode of thought being used or the order with which they adopted the different modes of thought (i.e., shifting from experiential to rational in Study 1 and from rational to experiential in Study 2), older adults consistently offered judgments and justifications that reflected a preference for experiential-based thought.</p>","PeriodicalId":520721,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition","volume":" ","pages":"339-61"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13825585.2011.615904","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"If only I had taken my usual route…: age-related differences in counter-factual thinking.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Horhota,&nbsp;Andrew Mienaltowski,&nbsp;Fredda Blanchard-Fields\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13825585.2011.615904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Previous research suggests that young adults can shift between rational and experiential modes of thinking when forming social judgments. The present study examines whether older adults demonstrate this flexibility in thinking. Young and older adults completed an If-only task adapted from Epstein, Lipson, and Huh's (1992 , Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 328) examination of individuals' ability to adopt rational or experiential modes of thought while making a judgment about characters who experience a negative event that could have been avoided. Consistent with our expectations for their judgments of the characters, young adults shifted between experiential and rational modes of thought when instructed to do so. Conversely, regardless of the mode of thought being used or the order with which they adopted the different modes of thought (i.e., shifting from experiential to rational in Study 1 and from rational to experiential in Study 2), older adults consistently offered judgments and justifications that reflected a preference for experiential-based thought.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520721,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"339-61\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/13825585.2011.615904\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2011.615904\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2011/11/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2011.615904","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/11/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

先前的研究表明,年轻人在形成社会判断时可以在理性和经验思维模式之间转换。目前的研究考察了老年人是否在思维上表现出这种灵活性。年轻人和老年人完成了一项仅假设的任务,该任务改编自Epstein、Lipson和Huh (1992, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 328),测试个人在判断经历了本可以避免的负面事件的人物时,采用理性或经验思维模式的能力。与我们对他们对角色的判断的期望一致,当被要求在经验和理性思维模式之间转换时,年轻人会这样做。相反,不管他们使用的思维模式是什么,也不管他们采用不同思维模式的顺序是什么(即,在研究1中从经验转向理性,在研究2中从理性转向经验),老年人始终如一地提供判断和辩护,这些判断和辩护反映了对基于经验的思维的偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
If only I had taken my usual route…: age-related differences in counter-factual thinking.

Previous research suggests that young adults can shift between rational and experiential modes of thinking when forming social judgments. The present study examines whether older adults demonstrate this flexibility in thinking. Young and older adults completed an If-only task adapted from Epstein, Lipson, and Huh's (1992 , Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 328) examination of individuals' ability to adopt rational or experiential modes of thought while making a judgment about characters who experience a negative event that could have been avoided. Consistent with our expectations for their judgments of the characters, young adults shifted between experiential and rational modes of thought when instructed to do so. Conversely, regardless of the mode of thought being used or the order with which they adopted the different modes of thought (i.e., shifting from experiential to rational in Study 1 and from rational to experiential in Study 2), older adults consistently offered judgments and justifications that reflected a preference for experiential-based thought.

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:604180095
Book学术官方微信