Abstract

Research on implicit conflict detection suggests that people are sensitive to violations of logical principles. When they make reasoning errors, their epistemic radar presumably detects an anomaly. This study tested conflict detection using novel measures: self-report measures of how much reasoners struggled when solving a problem and whether they considered an alternative response, and social inferences of what they believe other people would respond. Moreover, this study tested whether these social inferences are informed by how much conflict people feel when trying to decide on an answer themselves. Results show 1) that reasoners in general are conflict-sensitive, even when they are incorrect; but 2) this sensitivity is greater for correct vs. incorrect responders; and 3) the experience of conflict influences social inferences, such that reasoners are less likely to believe that other people share their response when they themselves considered an alternative response when trying to solve a problem.

摘要

关于隐式冲突检测的研究表明，人们对违反逻辑原理很敏感。当他们做出推理错误时，他们的认知雷达大概会发现异常。这项研究使用新颖的方法测试了冲突检测：自我报告的方法，用于解决问题时推理者的挣扎程度以及他们是否考虑替代性回应，以及对他人认为会回应的社会推断。此外，本研究测试了这些社会推论是否由人们在试图自己决定答案时感觉到的冲突有多大的信息。结果表明：1）即使推理不正确，推理程序通常也对冲突敏感；但是2）正确与不正确的响应者的敏感性更高；3）冲突经历会影响社会推论，