ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 1990, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (4): 21-27.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

冲动型和思索型认知方式在儿童逻辑推理中的中介作用

周润民   

  1. 中国科学院心理研究所
  • 出版日期:1990-12-25 发布日期:1990-12-25
  • 通讯作者: 周润民

THE MODERATOR ROLE OF REFLECTIVITY-IMPULSIVITY COGNITIVE STYLE IN CHILDREN'S LOGICAL REASONING

Zhou Run-Min Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing   

  • Online:1990-12-25 Published:1990-12-25

摘要: 通过选择相同图形测验(MFFT),小学一年级的儿童(平均年龄=6岁7月)被定为或具有“冲动型”(n=31)或具有“思索型”(N=33)两类不同的认知方式,然后分别在预试、启发和再测三个阶段,做性质相同的推理测验。对儿童在推理测验时自我解释的趋向的分析表明,思索型儿童在三次测试中都能注重答案的确实性。冲动型儿童预试时急于作答,但启发阶段由于主试的提醒和解释,纠正了急于作答的倾向并能注意答案的确实性,然而再测时由于测验的气氛,他们又恢复了急于作答而不注重答案准确性的倾向。结果,认知方式在一定情况下影响了儿童的推理成绩:预试时由于题的难度大思索型和冲动型儿童的成绩都不好,启发阶段两组儿童的进步都很大,然而再测试时,冲动型儿童退步,而思索型儿童却保持了启发后的水平。本实验结果意味着,在做一定难度的推理题时,思索型的认知方式会有助于儿童的成绩,而冲动型认知方式会掩盖儿童的能力。如果对冲动型的儿童随时多提醒些,让其自主支配时间,鼓励他们注重于答案的准确性,他们就可能改变认知方式而提高判断能力。

关键词: NULL

Abstract: Fisrt grade children (mean age= 6 years 7 months) were classifiedinto reflective (n=33) and impulsive(n=31) by Matching Familiar FigureTest. They were also tested on logical reasoning tasks in three periods:pretest, training and posttest. Analysis of children's spontaneous tenda-ncy of self-explanation suggests that: 1)The reflective children paid muchattention to the sureness of their judgments during all the three periodsof testing; 2)The impulsive children were eager to respond quickly at thepretest, but during the training, owing to the explanation of the experi-menter, they changed their reflectiveless habit and focused on the surenessof their answers, at the posttest however, they resumed their quickresponding tendancy. At the pretest both groups did equally poorlybecause the tasks proved to be too difficult, during the training both didequally well,and at the posttest the impulsive children regressed while thereflective children did not. The educational implications of the findingsare discussed in this paper.

Key words: NULL