Taking a Measure of Comparative Thinking: Revisiting Assimilation and Contrast

衡量比较思维：重新审视同化和对比

• 批准号: 273220452
• 负责人: Professor Dr. Roland Imhoff
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Abteilung für Sozial- und Rechtspsychologie
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Units
• 财政年份: 2015
• 资助国家: 德国
• 起止时间: 2014-12-31 至 2020-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/273220452?language=en
• 关键词: Taking; Measure; Comparative; Thinking; Revisiting

The way humans navigate their social environment and respond to situational affordances is inherently relative. In judging other individuals, people use comparison standards to calibrate their judgment whether this particular person is relatively intelligent or not, exhibiting either assimilative tendencies to adjust their judgment in the direction of a comparison standard or contrastive tendencies to move further away. Although there exist prominent models to explain the antecedents of such effects (most prominently, the selective accessibility model), a major drawback of current comparison research is the lack of a sensitive measure. There is no well-validated measure how much people rely on comparative information and to what extent they exhibit assimilative or contrastive tendencies. Without such a widely accepted measure inconsistencies throughout the literature remain ambiguous as to whether they speak to the underlying theory or are mere collateral damages of certain operationalizations. Specifically, inconsistent results may simply follow from people’s diverging perceptions of a given standard, or because a chosen standards was simply just not extreme enough to prompt contrast, or not moderate enough to prompt assimilation. In the present project we propose to further advance the development of a newly invented Comparative Judgment Task (in the first project phase) into a fine-grained measure of comparative processing. Adopting a novel curve-fitting approach will liberate us from the need to provide a consensual definition of what constitutes extreme, respectively moderate standards. Independent of the exact values and allowing for individual and situational differences thereof, any distribution of judgments as a function of comparison standards in a sine-wave form will a) confirm the predictions of the selective accessibility model and b) allow the extraction of exact parameters of comparative processing and assimilative vs. contrastive tendencies. In the present project phase 2 we will further validate this measure across a host of dimensions (work package 1), scrutinize its psychometric properties (work package 2), and provide illustrations of its experimental validation (work package 3). In the unexpected case of difficulties establishing validity in work package 1, we propose an alternative work package 4 that will scrutinize the existing literature to better understand the boundary conditions of typical effects of assimilation and contrast.

人类导航社会环境和对情境负担的反应方式是固有的。在其他人的法官中，人们使用比较标准来校准自己的判断，无论是否相对聪明，表现出同化倾向，以在比较标准的方向或对比度倾向的方向上调整其法官，以使其移开更远。尽管存在着重要的模型来解释这种效果的先例（最重要的是选择性可访问性模型），但当前比较研究的主要缺点是缺乏敏感的测量。尚无验证的测量值，有多少人依赖比较信息以及他们在多大程度上暴露了同化或对比度的趋势。在整个文献中，没有如此广泛接受的措施不一致仍然对它们是否对基本理论说话，还是仅仅是某些操作的附带损害。具体而言，不一致的结果可能仅仅是人们对特定标准的不同看法，或者是因为所选标准根本不足以引起对比度，或者不足以引起对比，以引起同化。在本项目中，我们建议进一步发展新发明的比较判断任务（在第一个项目阶段），以对比较处理的细粒度测量。采用一种新颖的曲线拟合方法将使我们摆脱对构成极其构成的最高标准的共识定义的需求。独立于精确值并允许其个人和情况差异，法官以正弦波形式的比较标准的任何分布将a）确认选择性可访问性模型的预测，b）允许提取比较处理的精确参数和同化和对比趋势。在本项目阶段2中，我们将在许多维度（工作包1）中进一步验证此措施，将其心理测量属性（工作包2）验证，并提供其实验验证的插图（工作包3）。在工作包1中建立有效性的困难的意外情况下，我们提出了一个替代工作包4，该替代工作包将使现有文献逐渐了解，以更好地了解同化和对比度典型影响的边界条件。