检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
出 处:《心理科学》2010年第4期887-890,共4页Journal of Psychological Science
基 金:教育部人文社会科学规划项目"条件推理的语义关系理解理论"(09YJAXLX016)的资助
摘 要:用大学生为被试的实验考察比较充分条件推理和必要条件推理。实验结果新发现,充分条件推理和必要条件推理有不同的推理模式。充分条件肯定前件格式推理的正确率明显大于逻辑对应的必要条件肯定后件格式推理的正确率。充分条件否定前件格式推理的正确率与逻辑对应的必要条件否定后件格式推理的正确率无显著差异。充分条件肯定后件格式推理的正确率与逻辑对应的必要条件肯定前件格式推理的正确率无显著差异。充分条件否定后件格式推理的正确率明显小于逻辑对应的必要条件否定前件格式推理的正确率。With college students as subjects, sufficient condition reasoning and necessary condition reasoning were examined and compared. The results showed that there were different reasoning patterns for the two conditional reasonings. The correction rates of reasoning in modus ponens of sufficient conditions were greater than those in affirming consequences of necessary conditions. There was no significant difference between the correction rates of reasoning in denying antecedents of sufficient conditions and those in modus tollens of necessary conditions. There was no significant difference between the correction rates of reasoning in affirming consequences of sufficient conditions and those in modus ponens of necessary conditions. The correction rates of reasoning in denying consequences of sufficient conditions were less than those in denying antecedents of necessary conditions.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.222