论文部分内容阅读
在各种专业或私人情境中,人们经常需要整合不同的意见来判断某一观点的对错。当观点的形式类似于将多个论点组合而成的逻辑公式(使用“且”、“或”等逻辑连接词)时,容易产生教条悖论(doctrinal paradox)。即,虽然整体意见支持该观点是正确的(或错误的),但是分析这些整体意见中所包含的各个论点,却会得到相反的结论。教条悖论是判断整合研究中关注的重要问题,已在各科学领域引发大量的规范性研究。行为心理学家需在这个重要问题上开展系统研究。本文简要介绍了教条悖论及其过往研究,总结已有的行为数据,并指出未来行为研究的方向和视角。
In a variety of professional or personal situations, people often need to combine different opinions to judge whether one viewpoint is right or wrong. A doctrinal paradox tends to arise when the point of view is analogous to a logical formula that combines multiple arguments (using logical conjunctions such as “and ”, “or ”). That is, while it is right (or wrong) for the whole Opinion to support this view, the analysis of the various arguments contained in these General Opinions leads to the opposite conclusion. Dogma paradox is an important issue to judge in the integration research, which has caused a large amount of normative research in various fields of science. Behavioral psychologists need to conduct systematic research on this important issue. This article briefly introduces dogmatic paradox and its past research, summarizes existing behavioral data and points out the direction and perspective of future behavioral research.