使用弗里思-快乐动画来比较非人类代理人的心理素质归因

IF 1.2 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Briana M. Sobel, V. Sims
{"title":"使用弗里思-快乐动画来比较非人类代理人的心理素质归因","authors":"Briana M. Sobel, V. Sims","doi":"10.1080/20445911.2023.2166053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT To understand perceptions of technology, researchers can compare them to perceptions of other nonhumans. In this study, a Theory of Mind assessment (the Frith-Happé animations) was used to assess perceptions of videos of moving triangles. Participants rated the triangles’ lifelikeness, intelligence, intention, emotion, and cognition. The triangles were labelled as humans, robots, dogs, or shapes. Results replicated patterns commonly found when using these animations and showed differences between agent labels. Triangles with a “humans” label had higher attributions of mental qualities than those with a “shapes” label. The “humans” label also had higher attributions of lifelikeness and emotion than the “robots” and “dogs” but were not significantly different from these labels for intention and cognition. These results promote the reliability and validity of the Frith-Happé animations but emphasise the importance of considering how the task is described and labelled to participants. Additional implications for the human-technology relationship are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47483,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using the Frith-Happé animations to compare attributions of mental qualities in nonhuman agents\",\"authors\":\"Briana M. Sobel, V. Sims\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20445911.2023.2166053\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT To understand perceptions of technology, researchers can compare them to perceptions of other nonhumans. In this study, a Theory of Mind assessment (the Frith-Happé animations) was used to assess perceptions of videos of moving triangles. Participants rated the triangles’ lifelikeness, intelligence, intention, emotion, and cognition. The triangles were labelled as humans, robots, dogs, or shapes. Results replicated patterns commonly found when using these animations and showed differences between agent labels. Triangles with a “humans” label had higher attributions of mental qualities than those with a “shapes” label. The “humans” label also had higher attributions of lifelikeness and emotion than the “robots” and “dogs” but were not significantly different from these labels for intention and cognition. These results promote the reliability and validity of the Frith-Happé animations but emphasise the importance of considering how the task is described and labelled to participants. Additional implications for the human-technology relationship are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognitive Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognitive Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2023.2166053\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2023.2166053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要为了理解对技术的认知,研究人员可以将其与其他非人类的认知进行比较。在这项研究中,使用心理理论评估(Frith Happé动画)来评估对移动三角形视频的感知。参与者对三角形的生活相似性、智力、意图、情感和认知能力进行了评分。三角形被标记为人类、机器人、狗或形状。结果复制了使用这些动画时常见的模式,并显示了代理标签之间的差异。带有“人类”标签的三角形比带有“形状”标签的人有更高的心理素质归因。与“机器人”和“狗”相比,“人类”标签在生活相似性和情感方面的归因也更高,但在意图和认知方面与这些标签没有显著差异。这些结果提高了Frith Happé动画的可靠性和有效性,但强调了考虑如何向参与者描述和标记任务的重要性。讨论了对人与技术关系的其他影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using the Frith-Happé animations to compare attributions of mental qualities in nonhuman agents
ABSTRACT To understand perceptions of technology, researchers can compare them to perceptions of other nonhumans. In this study, a Theory of Mind assessment (the Frith-Happé animations) was used to assess perceptions of videos of moving triangles. Participants rated the triangles’ lifelikeness, intelligence, intention, emotion, and cognition. The triangles were labelled as humans, robots, dogs, or shapes. Results replicated patterns commonly found when using these animations and showed differences between agent labels. Triangles with a “humans” label had higher attributions of mental qualities than those with a “shapes” label. The “humans” label also had higher attributions of lifelikeness and emotion than the “robots” and “dogs” but were not significantly different from these labels for intention and cognition. These results promote the reliability and validity of the Frith-Happé animations but emphasise the importance of considering how the task is described and labelled to participants. Additional implications for the human-technology relationship are discussed.
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
Journal of Cognitive Psychology
Journal of Cognitive Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
54
×
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