神经科学与心理学2021srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com
学龄前儿童在观察与证词冲突时很少主动寻求数据
Preschool children rarely seek data when observation and testimony conflict
进阶 · 约 30 分钟读完前置知识：发展心理学基础、实验设计、基础统计
导读
论文通过实验考察学前儿童在“亲眼观察”与“他人证词”冲突时，是否会主动寻求数据来验证信息。结果显示，学前儿童很少主动探索验证；相比之下，小学儿童在直觉被矛盾时更常比较和测试。研究提示，主动检验冲突信息的能力可能随年龄发展。
HN 关注点：儿童认知发展与确认偏误，并讨论实验是否因缺乏激励或社会压力而低估了儿童的探索意愿。
HN 评论精选
这几条评论里：质疑 2 补充 2
补充小学儿童会验证意外信息，而确认偏误可能是一种高效学习策略。
这个研究很有趣，也明确说明结论不适用于较大儿童。较大儿童会验证任何令人惊讶的说法；但他们也和成人一样受确认偏误影响：如果信息符合预期，就不会去核实。我猜确认偏误只是一种高效学习世界的方式——如果事情似乎符合你当前的理解，就不要浪费时间。
ElViajero查看英文原文
> Elementary school children significantly increased their exploration of the dolls when their intuitions had been contradicted as compared to when they had been confirmed, frequently picking up the smallest and the biggest doll concurrently to compare their relative weight—a direct test of the claim they had been given. Preschool children rarely engaged in this behavior, whether their intuitions had been confirmed or contradicted. Interesting study. Good to make clear that this does not apply to older children. Older children will verify any surprising claims. On the other hand they suffer, like adults, of confirmation bias. If the information fits their expectation they will not check is veracity. I guess that confirmation bias is just an efficient way of learning about the world, do not waste time if things seem to fit your current understanding of the world.
质疑质疑实验是否受社会规范或隐私影响，孩子可能觉得不被允许测试。
有没有可能是因为孩子不知道如何判断小雕像是否有效，或者认为自己不被允许触碰？这两种解释似乎都不合理。孩子刚看到“天真”实验者把小雕像放在盒子上，而且是被这个实验者要求分类，不是被那个看似懂行的实验者要求。原则上，天真实验者当着孩子的面试过小雕像，还暗示探索会有信息，比如“我不知道它怎么运作，但看起来你可以把这些部件放在这里……我想知道会发生什么！”如果孩子认为探索有信息量，这应该会激发探索。另外，天真实验者在任务期间离开桌子、背对孩子坐，以消除社会压力。但测试小雕像会被附近的天真实验者听到，未来研究可以看看完全隐私时是否会有更多孩子测试。我认为孩子可能觉得自己不该在音乐盒本身上测试小雕像。
adrusi查看英文原文
Could it be that children lacked the knowledge of how to determine whether or not the figurines worked, or believed they were not allowed to touch them? Neither interpretation seems plausible. Recall that children had just seen the naïve experimenter place the figurines on the box, and were asked to sort the figurines by this naïve experimenter, not by the apparently knowledgeable experimenter who told them about which figurine worked. In principle, the fact that the person who asked children to sort the figurines had tried them out on the music box as children watched, and also implied that exploring the figurines would provide information about how the music box worked by saying “I don’t know how it works, but it looks like you can put these pieces on this thing here [placing a hand on the center of the music box]. I wonder what will happen if I do that!”, should have primed children’s exploration if they conceptualized such exploration as informative. Furthermore, the naïve informant left the table and sat faced away from the child during the task, attempting to remove potential social pressure not to question the informant’s testing. However, given that testing the figurines would have been audible to the nearby naïve experimenter, future studies may be useful to assess whether additional children would have tested the figurines if left in total privacy. I think that children might well have felt they weren't supposed to test the figurines on the music box itself, and this explanation doesn't completely satisfy me. The setup makes it seem like some kind of game, and testing directly on the music box might intuitively seem like cheating.
质疑缺乏激励可能降低儿童主动探索的动机。
我认为应该加激励。不要问“如果我想让音乐盒播放，该用哪个小雕像？”，而是在分类任务前告诉孩子：如果让音乐盒播放，就给他棉花糖。没有激励，孩子可能不够在乎去调查。
ALittleLight查看英文原文
I think they should have done this with an incentive. Basically, don't ask "If I want to make the music box play, which figurine should I use?" But tell the children before the sorting task that if they make the music box play you'll give them a marshmallow. Without an incentive the kids may just not care enough to investigate.
补充讽刺成人同样常在有冲突时回避数据，讨论房价时尤其明显。
只是学前儿童吗？HN 上的成人也很少在观察与证词冲突时寻求数据。我反复看到的例子是，美国/加拿大西海岸的人讨论房价与供应量时，用高中经济学搪塞，不需要数据。你指出这不是数据时，别人又会把公寓租约和房产所有权混为一谈。
austincheney查看英文原文
Just preschool children? Adults on HN rarely seek data when observation and testimony conflict. The example I have observed over and over on HN is from people on the US/Canadian west coast and property prices versus availability. They shrug off any need for data by talking about high school economics. When you point out that this isn’t data others will chime in confusing apartment leases for property ownership.
相关资源
从这篇论文所有 HN 讨论帖的全部评论里整理出来的链接。
历次讨论
- 2021Hacker News 讨论帖154 分 · 83 评
同领域还值得读
神经科学家能理解微处理器吗？（2017）
Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor? (2017)
提出一个思想实验：把神经科学常用的分析方法（损伤实验、电生理、功能定位等）应用到一个我们完全了解其原理的工程系统——6502 微处理器（运行游戏）上，检验这些方法能否真正“理解”…
神经科学与心理学2017 · 411 分 · 135 评进阶 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选大脑衰老呈现非线性转变，提示中年“关键窗口”
Brain aging shows nonlinear transitions, suggesting a midlife "critical window"
这篇 PNAS 论文研究大脑衰老的非线性变化，发现大脑老化并非匀速进行，而是在中年（约 40-60 岁）存在一个关键的"临界窗口期"，此时干预可能有效。
神经科学与心理学2025 · 295 分 · 159 评进阶 · 约 75 分钟编辑精选社交网络中大规模情绪传染的证据（2014）
Evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks (2014)
这篇 2014 年发表于 PNAS 的论文研究了 Facebook 上约 70 万用户的信息流中，减少正面或负面内容是否会传染性地影响用户自己发布内容的情绪。
神经科学与心理学2020 · 285 分 · 72 评入门 · 约 45 分钟编辑精选裸盖菇素使人类大脑去同步化
Psilocybin desynchronizes the human brain
这篇 Nature 研究用个体化的 fMRI 精密成像追踪受试者服用裸盖菇素（psilocybin）前后的脑功能连接变化，发现药物会造成大范围的脑网络「去同步化」，尤其是默认模式…
神经科学与心理学2024 · 273 分 · 259 评进阶 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选对智力的赞扬会削弱儿童的动机与表现（1998）
Praise for Intelligence Can Undermine Children's Motivation (1998)
这篇 1998 年的经典论文（Dweck 等人）通过实验研究表扬方式对儿童动机的影响：夸孩子“聪明”（表扬智力）会让他们回避挑战、害怕失败，而表扬努力则更能培养坚持性。
神经科学与心理学2016 · 253 分 · 155 评入门 · 约 45 分钟编辑精选