论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨两种实验范式中的后见偏差效应。方法:实验一采用单因素两水平被试间实验设计,随机挑选80名高校在校男大学生进行后见偏差的假定型实验。将他们分成先见组和后见组,每组40人。用自制问卷测查不同组别的后见偏差效应。实验二采用单因素两水平被试内实验设计,随机挑选高校在校男大学生67名进行后见偏差的记忆型实验。用相同自制问卷比较同一被试的初始判断与知道调查结果后的回忆判断。结果:实验一:质量因素在F组与H组中,所占百分比分别为25.38%和52.32%,Z=-4.902,P<0.001,两者有显著统计学意义。实验二:一周前与一周后质量因素的百分比分别为37.73%和51.12%,F=16.393,P<0.001,两者有显著差异。结论:两种试验范式都证明了后见效应现象的存在。
Objective: To investigate the effect of post-implantation bias in two experimental paradigms. Methods: In the first experiment, a single-factor, two-level inter-experimental design was used to select randomly 80 hypothetical experiments of undergraduates who were post-graduate with male college students. Divide them into pre-sessional and post-sessional groups of 40 people each. Self-made questionnaires were used to examine the effect of post-implantation bias in different groups. In experiment two, one-factor and two-level experimental design was used in the experiment. Randomly select 67 male college students in college to make post-deviation memory experiments. The same self-made questionnaire was used to compare the initial test of the same subject and the memory judgment after knowing the result of the investigation. Results: In the first experiment, the percentage of quality factors in group F and group H were 25.38% and 52.32%, respectively, Z = -4.902, P <0.001, both of which had significant statistical significance. Experiment 2: The percentages of quality factors one week earlier and one week later were 37.73% and 51.12%, respectively, F = 16.393, P <0.001. There was a significant difference between the two. Conclusion: Both experimental paradigms demonstrate the existence of the post-see effect phenomenon.