认知反思风格对存流量关系判断中S-F错误的影响及脑活动特征
Effects of Cognitive Reflective Style on S-F Failure in Stock-Flow Relationship Judgments and Characteristics of Brain Activity
DOI: 10.12677/AP.2023.133111, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 盛盼盼：天津仁爱学院学工部，天津；赵 彤：天津市医学考试中心，天津；孟鸿兴：天津师范大学心理学部，天津；王晓庄：天津师范大学心理学部，天津；天津师范大学心理与行为研究院，天津；学生心理发展与学习天津市高校社会科学实验室，天津
关键词: 累积变量判断偏差；S-F错误；fNIRS；关联启发式；Cumulative Variable Judgment Bias； S-F Failure； fNIRS； Correlation Heuristic
摘要: 本研究通过两个研究，考察直觉型思维倾向与分析型思维倾向个体在存流量关系判断中S-F错误的差异及脑活动特征。研究一比较认知反思测验高分组和低分组(即直觉型思维倾向组和分析型思维倾向组)存流量关系判断中发生S-F错误的差异，研究二比较认知反思测验高分组和低分组在存流量关系判断中的脑活动特征。结果发现：在存流量关系问题判断中，相对于分析型思维倾向组，直觉型思维倾向组出现更高比例的S-F错误；分析型思维倾向组的右侧额下回(IFC)、背外侧前额叶(dlPFC)和额极(FPC)激活程度显著高于直觉型思维倾向组，对启发式系统的使用起到了抑制作用，从而减少了S-F错误的出现。
Abstract: In this study, two studies were conducted to examine the differences in S-F failure and brain activity characteristics between individuals with intuitive and analytical thinking tendencies in stock- flow relationship judgments. Study 1 compared the differences in the occurrence of S-F failure in stock-flow relationship judgments between the high and low subgroups of the Cognitive Reflection Test (i.e., the Intuitive Thinking Tendency and Analytical Thinking Tendency groups). Study 2 compared the brain activity characteristics of high and low subgroups of the Cognitive Reflection Test in stock flow relationship judgments. It was found that a higher percentage of S-F failure was found in the intuitive thinking group compared to the analytical thinking group in the stock-flow failure. The right inferior frontal gyrus (IFC), dorsolateral prefrontal (dlPFC) and frontopolar (FPC) activation was significantly higher in the analytic thinking tendency group than in the intuitive thinking tendency group, which inhibited the use of the heuristic system and thus reduced the occurrence of S-F failure.
文章引用：盛盼盼, 赵彤, 孟鸿兴, 王晓庄 (2023). 认知反思风格对存流量关系判断中S-F错误的影响及脑活动特征. 心理学进展, 13(3), 923-938. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2023.133111

参考文献

[1] 王晓庄, 王思聪, 牟伟莉, 张建娥, 尹文超(2018). 动态系统累积变量判断中的关联启发式. 心理科学进展, 26(2), 344-357.
[2] Aşιk, G., & Doğança Küçük, Z. (2021). Metacognition in Action as a Possible Explanation for Stock-Flow Failure. System Dynamics Review, 37, 253-282.[CrossRef] 
[3] Baghaei Lakeh, A., & Ghaffarzadegan, N. (2016). The Dual-Process Theory and Understanding of Stocks and Flows. System Dynamics Review, 32, 309-331.[CrossRef] 
[4] Brunstein, A., Gonzalez, C., & Kanter, S. (2010). Effects of Domain Experience in the Stock-Flow Failure. System Dynamics Review, 26, 347-354.[CrossRef] 
[5] Corgnet, B., Espín, A. M., & Hernán-González, R. (2015). The Cognitive Basis of Social Behavior: Cognitive Reflection Overrides Antisocial but Not Always Prosocial Motives. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 287.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Cronin, M. A., & Gonzalez, C. (2007). Understanding the Building Blocks of Dynamic Systems. System Dynamics Review: The Journal of the System Dynamics Society, 23, 1-17.[CrossRef] 
[7] Cronin, M. A., Gonzalez, C., & Sterman, J. D. (2009). Why Don’t Well-Educated Adults Understand Accumulation? A Challenge to Researchers, Educators, and Citizens. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 116-130.[CrossRef] 
[8] Dutt, V., & Gonzalez, C. (2012). Decisions from Experience Reduce Misconceptions about Climate Change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, 19-29.[CrossRef] 
[9] Fischer, H., & Gonzalez, C. (2016). Making Sense of Dynamic Systems: How Our Understanding of Stocks and Flows Depends on a Global Perspective. Cognitive Science, 40, 496-512.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 25-42.[CrossRef] 
[11] Gonzalez, C., Qi, L., Sriwattanakomen, N., & Chrabaszcz, J. (2017). Graphical Features of Flow Behavior and the Stock and Flow Failure. System Dynamics Review, 33, 59-70.[CrossRef] 
[12] Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness Revisited: Attribute Substitution in Intuitive Judgment. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, 49, 74.[CrossRef] 
[13] Kainz, D., & Ossimitz, G. (2002). Can Students Learn Stock-Flow-Thinking? An Empirical Investigation. In The 2002 System Dynamics Conference (pp. 1-34). System Dynamics Society.
[14] Kapmeier, F., Happach, R. M., & Tilebein, M. (2017). Bathtub Dynamics Revisited: An Examination of Déformation Professionelle in Higher Education. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 34, 227-249.[CrossRef] 
[15] Laureiro-Martinez, D., Canessa, N., Brusoni, S., Zollo, M., Hare, T., Alemanno, F., & Cappa, S. F. (2014). Frontopolar Cortex and Decision-Making Efficiency: Comparing Brain Activity of Experts with Different Professional Background during an Exploration-Exploitation Task. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 927.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Newell, B. R., Kary, A., Moore, C., & Gonzalez, C. (2016). Managing the Budget: Stock-Flow Reasoning and the CO2 Accumulation Problem. Topics in Cognitive Science, 8, 138-159.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Ossimitz, G. (2002). Stock-Flow-Thinking and Reading Stock-Flow-Related Graphs: An Emperical Investigation in Dynamic Thinking Abilities. In The International System Dynamics Conference.
[18] Pala, Ö., & Vennix, J. A. (2005). Effect of System Dynamics Education on Systems Thinking Inventory Task Performance. System Dynamics Review: The Journal of the System Dynamics Society, 21, 147-172.[CrossRef] 
[19] Schaeffer, D. J., Krafft, C. E., Schwarz, N. F., Chi, L., Rodrigue, A. L., Pierce, J. E. et al. (2014). An 8-Month Exercise Intervention Alters Frontotemporal White Matter Integrity in Overweight Children. Psychophysiology, 51, 728-733.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] Singh, A. K., & Dan, I. (2006). Exploring the False Discovery Rate in Multichannel NIRS. NeuroImage, 33, 542-549.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Stanovich, K. E. (2009). Matthew Effects in Reading: Some Consequences of Individual Differences in the Acquisition of Literacy. Journal of Education, 189, 23-55.[CrossRef] 
[22] Sterman, J. D. (1989). Misperceptions of Feedback in Dy-namic Decision Making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 301-335.[CrossRef] 
[23] Sterman, J. D. (2002). All Models Are Wrong: Reflections on Becoming a Systems Scientist. System Dynamics Review, 18, 501-531.[CrossRef] 
[24] Sterman, J. D. (2008). Risk Communication on Climate: Mental Models and Mass Balance. Science, 322, 532-533.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[25] Stocker, K., & Funke, J. (2019). How We Conceptualize Climate Change: Revealing the Force-Dynamic Structure Underlying Stock-Flow Reasoning. Journal of Dynamic Decision Making, 5, 1-10.
[26] Strohhecker, J., &Leyer, M. (2019). How Stock-Flow Failure and General Cognitive Ability Impact Performance in Operational Dynamic Control Tasks. European Journal of Operational Research, 276, 1044-1055.[CrossRef] 
[27] Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Practitioner Review: Do Performance-Based Measures and Ratings of Executive Function Assess the Same Construct? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54, 131-143.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Tsujii, T., & Watanabe, S. (2009). Neural Correlates of Dual-Task Effect on Belief-Bias Syllogistic Reasoning: A Near-Infrared Spectroscopy Study. Brain Research, 1287, 118-125.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[29] Tsujii, T., & Watanabe, S. (2010). Neural Correlates of Be-lief-Bias Reasoning under Time Pressure: A Near-Infrared Spectroscopy Study. Neuroimage, 50, 1320-1326.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[30] Tsujii, T., Sakatani, K., Masuda, S., Akiyama, T., & Watanabe, S. (2011). Evaluating the Roles of the Inferior Frontal Gyrus and Superior Parietal Lobule in Deductive Reasoning: An rTMS Study. NeuroImage, 58, 640-646.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[31] Weinhardt, J. M., Hendijani, R., Harman, J. L., Steel, P., & Gonzalez, C. (2015). How Analytic Reasoning Style and Global Thinking Relate to Understanding Stocks and Flows. Journal of Operations Management, 39-40, 23-30.[CrossRef] 
[32] Ye, J. C., Tak, S., Jang, K. E., Jung, J., & Jang, J. (2009). NIRS-SPM: Statistical Parametric Mapping for Near-Infrared Spectroscopy. Neuroimage, 44, 428-447.[CrossRef] [PubMed]