政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/142109

政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/142109

English | 正體中文 | 简体中文 | Post-Print筆數 : 27 | 全文筆數/總筆數 : 112879/143845 (78%)
造訪人次 : 50045098 線上人數 : 554

RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.

搜尋範圍

查詢小技巧：

您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果

若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料

進階搜尋

主頁 ‧ 登入 ‧ 上傳 ‧ 說明 ‧ 關於政大典藏 ‧ 管理

到手機版

政大機構典藏 > 理學院 > 心理學系 > 學位論文 > Item 140.119/142109

請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/142109

題名:	知性謙虛對心理偏誤之影響 Exploring the Effect of Intellectual Humility on Individual’s Psychological Bias
作者:	温佩樺 Wen, Pei-Hua
貢獻者:	孫蒨如 Sun, Chien-Ru 温佩樺 Wen, Pei-Hua
關鍵詞:	知性謙虛解釋深度的錯覺心理偏誤後見之明偏誤自利偏誤驗證性偏誤 Intellectual humility Illusion of explanatory depth Psychological bias Hindsight bias Self-serving bias Confirmation bias
日期:	2022
上傳時間:	2022-10-05 09:10:57 (UTC+8)
摘要:	「知性謙虛」（intellectual humility）指的是個體認知到自己的某種信念有可能是錯誤的，並且注意到不管是在該信念的證據基礎上或是個人在獲取和評估相關資訊上都有其侷限性。目前知性謙虛在心理學領域中主要被視為一種性格傾向來測量，然而有些研究者則認為知性謙虛是可以被誘發的，但卻鮮少有研究對此加以探討。另外，先前也有研究者認為知性謙虛應可降低心理偏誤，但也同樣缺乏實證研究的支持。基於上述的不足之處，本研究主要目的之一在於透過實驗的方式，探討是否有可能誘發個體的知性謙虛。另一目的則是透過誘發知性謙虛，進一步來檢驗其對於心理偏誤之影響，並檢驗其可能的中介機制。研究一嘗試採用解釋深度的錯覺的派典來誘發知性謙虛。結果發現相較於未誘發組，誘發組確實可以讓受試者出現知性謙虛的狀態，使其自評對公共議題的理解程度降低。研究二則透過誘發知性謙虛來比較誘發組和未誘發組在後見之明偏誤和自利偏誤上的差異，結果發現誘發知性謙虛組的受試者的後見之明偏誤確實顯著較低。研究三嘗試探討誘發知性謙虛對驗證性偏誤的影響，但研究結果並未發現誘發組和未誘發組在驗證性偏誤的程度上有顯著差異。此外，本研究亦針對知性謙虛影響心理偏誤之可能途徑進行探討，研究結果中並未發現認知自我評價或系統性思考的中介效果。本研究針對結果之意涵進行討論並對後續研究提出相關建議。 Although intellectual humility has been primarily conceptualized as a personality disposition in previous studies, some researchers believe that intellectual humility can be induced, but few studies have explored it. In addition, some researchers have suggested that intellectual humility can reduce psychological biases, but it also lacks the support of empirical research. Therefore, main goal of this study is to induce individuals` intellectual humility through experimental manipulation. Another goal is to explore the effect of induced intellectual humility on psychological bias, and to examine its possible mediating mechanism. Study 1 tried to induce intellectual humility using the paradigm of the illusion of explanatory depth. The results showed that compared with the non-induced condition, participants in the induced condition did show intellectually humility, and their self-reported understanding of public issues decreased. Study 2 compared the differences in hindsight bias and self-serving bias between the induced intellectual humility condition and the non-induced condition, and found that the participants in the induced intellectual humility condition did have significantly lower hindsight bias. Study 3 attempted to explore the effect of induced intellectual humility on confirmation bias, but the results did not find significant differences in confirmation bias between the induced group and the non-induced group. Furthermore, this study also explored the mediating pathway of the influence of intellectual humility on psychological bias. The results did not find the mediating effect of cognitive self-evaluation or systematic thinking. Implications of the results and suggestions for future research were also discussed.
參考文獻:	朱真茹、楊國樞（1976）：〈個人現代性與相對作業量對報酬分配行為的影響〉。《中央研究院民族學研究所集刊》，41，79-95。米建國（2014）：〈兩種德性知識論：知識的本質、價值與懷疑論〉。《世界哲學》，5，21-32。林建福（2019）：〈Ernest Sosa德行可靠論（Virtue Reliabilism）與教育知識論的哲學探究〉。《教育研究集刊》，65，1-38。孫蒨如、林慧慈、洪嘉欣（2017）：〈當自我資源耗竭面對維持正向自我評價需求時：自我調控的啟動與運作〉。《中華心理學刊》，59，163-181。廖玲燕（2000）：《台灣本土社會讚許量表之編製及其心理歷程分析》（未出版碩士論文），國立臺灣大學。葉力綺、許功餘（2019）：〈華人開放性與畫作偏好之關係：以認知閉合需求為中介〉。《本土心理學研究》，52，173-225。蔡政宏（2014）：〈荀子與德性知識論〉。《哲學與文化》，41，121-142。 Alfano, M., Iurino, K., Stey, P., Robinson, B., Christen, M., Yu, F., & Lapsley, D. (2017). Development and validation of a multi-dimensional measure of intellectual humility. PloS One, 12, e0182950. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0182950 Armor, D. A., & Taylor, S. E. (2002). When predictions fail: The dilemma of unrealistic optimism. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 334-347). New York: Cambridge University Press. Bhattacharya, O., Chatterjee, A., & Basu, J. (2017). Humility: An Emerging Construct in Moral Psychology. Psychological Studies, 62, 1-11. Blank, H., Fischer, V., & Erdfelder, E. (2003). Hindsight bias in political elections. Memory, 11, 491-504. Bowes, S. M., Costello, T. H., Lee, C., McElroy-Heltzel, S., Davis, D. E., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2022). Stepping Outside the Echo Chamber: Is Intellectual Humility Associated with Less Political Myside Bias?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48, 150-164. Brienza, J. P., Kung, F. Y., Santos, H. C., Bobocel, D. R., & Grossmann, I. (2018). Wisdom, bias, and balance: Toward a process-sensitive measurement of wisdom-related cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 1093-1126. Campbell, J. D., & Tesser, A. (1983). Motivational interpretations of hindsight bias: An individual difference analysis. Journal of Personality, 51, 605-620. Campbell, W. K., Sedikides, C., Reeder, G. D., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Among friends? An examination of friendship and the self‐serving bias. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 229-239. Church, I., & Samuelson, P. (2016). Intellectual humility: An introduction to the philosophy and science. Bloomsbury Publishing. Danovitch, J. H., Fisher, M., Schroder, H., Hambrick, D. Z., & Moser, J. (2019). Intelligence and neurophysiological markers of error monitoring relate to children`s intellectual humility. Child development, 90, 924-939. Davis, D. E., Rice, K., McElroy, S., DeBlaere, C., Choe, E., Van Tongeren, D. R., & Hook, J. N. (2016). Distinguishing intellectual humility and general humility. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11, 215-224. Deffler, S. A., Leary, M. R., & Hoyle, R. H. (2016). Knowing what you know: Intellectual humility and judgments of recognition memory. Personality and Individual Differences, 96, 255-259. Evans, J. S. (2007). Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgment. New York: Psychology Press. Evans, J. S. B. T., & Curtis-Holmes, J. (2005). Rapid responding increases belief bias: Evidence for the dual-process theory of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 11, 382-389. Fernbach, P. M., Rogers, T., Fox, C. R., & Sloman, S. A. (2013). Political extremism is supported by an illusion of understanding. Psychological Science, 24, 939-946. Grossmann, I., Gerlach, T. M., & Denissen, J. J. (2016). Wise reasoning in the face of everyday life challenges. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 611-622. Grossmann, I., Na, J., Varnuma, M. E. W., Park, D. C., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2010). Reasoning about social conflicts improves into old age. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 7246-7250. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1001715107 Haggard, M., Rowatt, W. C., Leman, J. C., Meagher, B., Moore, C., Fergus, T., Whitcomb, D., Battaly, H., Baehr, J., & Howard-Snyder, D. (2018). Finding middle ground between intellectual arrogance and intellectual servility: Development and assessment of the limitations-owning intellectual humility scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 124, 184-193. Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York, US: Cuilford press. Hill, P. C., & Laney, E. K. (2016). Beyond self-interest: Humility and the quieted self. In K. W. Brown, & M. R. Leary (Eds.). Oxford handbook of hypo-egoic phenomena (pp. 243-256). New York: Oxford University Press. Hopkin, C. R., Hoyle, R. H., & Toner, K. (2014). Intellectual humility and reactions to opinions about religious beliefs. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 42, 50-61. Howard-Pitney, B., Borgida, E., & Omoto, A. M. (1986). Personal involvement: An examination of processing differences. Social Cognition, 4, 39-57. Jonas, E., Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., & Thelen, N. (2001). Confirmation bias in sequential information search after preliminary decisions: an expansion of dissonance theoretical research on selective exposure to information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 557. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases (pp. 49-81). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kidd, I. J. (2016). Intellectual humility, confidence, and argumentation. Topoi, 35, 395-402. Kross, E., & Grossmann, I. (2012). Boosting wisdom: Distance from the self enhances wise reasoning, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 43-48. Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J. (2017). Intellectual humility and prosocial values: Direct and mediated effects. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12, 13-28. Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., Haggard, M. C., LaBouff, J. P., & Rowatt, W. C. (2020). Links between intellectual humility and acquiring knowledge. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 15, 155-170. Krumrei-Mancuso, E. J., & Rouse, S. V. (2016). The development and validation of the comprehensive intellectual humility scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 209-221. Kudashov, V., & Mosienko, M. (2018). Intellectual Humility in Public Discussion. In Convention 2017“Modernization and Multiple Modernities”, KnE Social Sciences, pages 384-393. DOI 10.18502/kss.v3i7.2489 Leary, M. R., Diebels, K. J., Davisson, E. K., Jongman-Sereno, K. P., Isherwood, J. C., Raimi, K. T., Deffler, S. A., & Hoyle, R. H. (2017). Cognitive and interpersonal features of intellectual humility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 793-813. Liao, Q. & Fu, W. (2013, April 27-May 2). Beyond the filter bubble: interactive effects of perceived threat and topic involvement on selective exposure to information. CHI 2013: Changing Perspectives, Paris, France. https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654. 2481326 McElroy, S. E., Rice, K. G., Davis, D. E., Hook, J. N., Hill, P. C., Worthington Jr, E. L., & Van Tongeren, D. R. (2014). Intellectual humility: Scale development and theoretical elaborations in the context of religious leadership. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 42, 19-30. Meagher, B. R., Leman, J. C., Bias, J. P., Latendresse, S. J., & Rowatt, W. C. (2015). Contrasting self-report and consensus ratings of intellectual humility and arrogance. Journal of Research in Personality, 58, 35-45. Mercier, H. (2016). The argumentative theory: Predictions and empirical evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 689-700. Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving attributional bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 711-747. Muramoto, Y., & Yamaguchi, S. (1997). Another type of self-serving bias: Coexistence of self-effacing and group-serving tendencies in attribution in the Japanese culture. Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 65-75. Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E., & Dragan, W. (1993). Information relevance, working memory, and the consideration of alternatives. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 759-778. Pohl, R. F. (2007). Ways to assess hindsight bias. Social Cognition, 25, 14-31. Porter, T., & Schumann, K. (2018). Intellectual humility and openness to the opposing view. Self and Identity, 17, 139-162. Pyszczynski, T., & Greenberg, J. (1987). Toward an integration of cognitive and motivational perspectives on social inferences: A biased hypothesis-testing model. I. L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 297–340). San Diego, CA: Academic Press Reis, H. T., Lee, K. Y., O`Keefe, S. D., & Clark, M. S. (2018). Perceived partner responsiveness promotes intellectual humility. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 79, 21-33. Roberts, R. C., & Wood, W. J. (2003). Humility and Epistemic Goods. In M. DePaul & L. Zagzebski (Eds.), Intellectual virtue: Perspectives from ethics and epistemology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Robins, R. W., Hendin, H. M., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the rosenberg self-esteem scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 151-161. Roese, N. J., & Vohs, K. D. (2012). Hindsight bias. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 411-426. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. C. (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth. Cognitive Science, 26, 521-562. Samuelson, P. L., & Church, I. M. (2015). When cognition turns vicious: Heuristics and biases in light of virtue epistemology. Philosophical Psychology, 28, 1095-1113. Samuelson, P. L., Church, I. M., Jarvinen, M., & Paulus, T. (2012). The science of intellectual humility white paper. Pasadena, CA: Fuller Theological Seminary School of Psychology. Unpublished manuscript. Schatz, D. A. (2019). Boundaries of the hindsight bias. [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley]. eScholarship. https://escholarship.org/uc/item /3q75w2p7 Sosa, E. (1980). The raft and the pyramid: Coherence versus foundations in the theory of knowledge. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 5, 3-26. Sosa, E. (1991). Knowledge in perspective: Selected essays in epistemology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Stanovich, K. E. (2009). Distinguishing the reflective, algorithmic, and autonomous minds: Is it time for a tri-process theory? In J. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 55-88). New York: Oxford University Press. Stanovich, K. E., & Toplak, M. E. (2019). The need for intellectual diversity in psychological science: Our own studies of actively open-minded thinking as a case study. Cognition, 187, 156-166. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342-357. Stark, J. H., & Milyavsky, M. (2019). Towards a Better Understanding of Lawyers` Judgmental Biases in Client Representation: The Role of Need for Cognitive Closure. Wash. UJL & Pol`y, 59, 173-216. Suhay, E., & Erisen, C. (2018). The role of anger in the biased assimilation of political information. Political Psychology, 39, 793-810. Tangney, J. P. (2000). Humility: Theoretical perspectives, empirical findings and directions for future research. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 70-82. Trumbo, C. W. (2002). Information processing and risk perception: An adaptation of the heuristic-systematic model. Journal of communication, 52, 367-382. Walster, E., Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151-176. Ward, A. F. (2013). One with the cloud: Why people mistake the Internet’s knowledge for their own [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Department of Psychology, Harvard University. Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049-1062. Weiner, B. (1986). An Attributional Theory of Motivation and Emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag. Werth, L., & Strack, F. (2003). An inferential approach to the knew-it-all-along phenomenon. Memory, 11, 411-419. West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 930-941. Westbrook, C. (2022). The Validity of the General Intellectual Humility Scale as a Measure of Intellectual Humility. [Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University]. ScholarWorks at Georgia State University. https://doi.org/10.57709/26675627 Whitcomb, D., Battaly, H., Baehr, J., & Howard-Snyder, D. (2015). Intellectual humility: Owning our limitations. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 94, 509-539. Wong, I. H. M., & Wong, T. T. Y. (2021). Exploring the relationship between intellectual humility and academic performance among post-secondary students: The mediating roles of learning motivation and receptivity to feedback. Learning and Individual Differences, 88, 102012. Wood, G. (1978). The knew-it-all-along effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 4, 345-353. Zachry, C. E., Phan, L. V., Blackie, L. E., & Jayawickreme, E. (2018). Situation-based contingencies underlying wisdom-content manifestations: Examining intellectual humility in daily life. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 73, 1404-1415. Zmigrod, L., Zmigrod, S., Rentfrow, P. J., & Robbins, T. W. (2019). The psychological roots of intellectual humility: the role of intelligence and cognitive flexibility. Personality and Individual Differences, 141, 200-208.
描述:	碩士國立政治大學心理學系 106752016
資料來源:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106752016
資料類型:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202201533
顯示於類別:	[心理學系] 學位論文

文件中的檔案:

檔案	描述	大小	格式	瀏覽次數
201601.pdf		4804Kb	Adobe PDF2	0	檢視/開啟

在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

社群 sharing

著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement

1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.

DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004 MIT & Hewlett-Packard / Enhanced by NTU Library IR team Copyright © - 回饋