411 reputation
17
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year, 9 months
seen Nov 13 '13 at 15:04

Doctoral Candidate in Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Science at Indiana University (Bloomington)


Mar
1
comment What is the bias/thought process that results in distrust of “formal” knowledge in favor of “folk” knowledge?
@Ben Brocka, few people know the details of the evidence, nor are they qualified to judge whether it is "thoroughly proven." Thus, they are forced to rely on other people's assessments of the evidence, to which my earlier comments apply. It would be interesting to know why science is trusted more in some areas than others, but I doubt this reflects a systematic bias in favor of folk science as such. It can be explained more parsimoniously by a general mechanism such as greater skepticism regarding claims - scientific or otherwise - that conflict with existing beliefs or values.
Mar
1
comment What is the bias/thought process that results in distrust of “formal” knowledge in favor of “folk” knowledge?
I don't think there is anything unusual, from a psychological point of view, about some people instinctively distrusting scientists. Why would they trust scientists by default? Scientists are as liable as anyone else to bias by incentives or their own belief systems. I would guess that folk knowledge is often passed on through personal connections and thus, for some, the source may seem more trustworthy than some scientist they have never met before.
Feb
22
answered Does an exceptional working memory inhibit intelligence?
Feb
19
comment Quantify degree to which non-diagnostic features bias category-present response
(b) While it's technically correct to say that participants don't know the true probabilities, it would IMHO be more accurate to say that they know, or should know (based on training received), that at any given moment, one and only one feature is relevant, and that feature is perfectly diagnostic. The task is not framed in terms of probabilities - it's completely deterministic. So I am not sure I see the relevance of a Bayesian framework here. Also, they don't get any feedback, so even if I were using a Bayesian framework, I don't see how I'd do updating.
Feb
19
comment Quantify degree to which non-diagnostic features bias category-present response
@Jeromy, sorry for such a long delay in my reply. (a) there might be some misunderstanding. Each stimulus has 3 features. Suppose I am considering the probabilities of "yes" responses regarding questions for which feature X is relevant, and I'm comparing that probability for stimuli where feature Y is present to the probability where Y is absent. In reality, feature X is present for 50% of the stimuli in which feature Y is present, and also for 50% of the stimuli in which feature Y is absent, so a correct responder will answer "yes" 50% of the time for both types of stimuli.
Jan
18
awarded  Teacher
Jan
18
answered Categorization studies with a procedure similar to Shepard et al (1961) and Medin & Schaffer (1978)
Jan
15
awarded  Student
Jan
15
asked Quantify degree to which non-diagnostic features bias category-present response