博文
从众偏执-I
||
目录
1 Conformity Paranoia
2 Confirmation Bias
=========================
从众偏执：
“A considerable number of individuals are inclined to align with authority, seemingly believing that this aligning somehow validates their own greatness.”
https://www.peeref.com/roulette-hubs/1044
很多人以为“以个体的思维独立于群体的思维为荣”是西方文化传统。
但是这仅仅是一种偏见。
实际上从众偏执仍然是西方的主流价值观，
例如所有西方的主流学术期刊，都倾向于把颠覆主流权威理论的稿件视作“民科”、“错误”的代名词予以退稿歧视，表明西方的正统文化仍然是从众偏执。
公开践行从众偏执的例子：
“AIP Advances does not accept submissions that contain extraordinary claims that contradict well-established physical law. Such claims require extraordinary efforts to verify, which we cannot provide.“
https://pubs.aip.org/aip/adv/pages/policies
学术期刊的目的是促进科学进步，是不同观点争鸣的平台，所以“Such claims require extraordinary efforts to verify, which we cannot provide“理由不充分，真正的原因是从众偏执。
1 Conformity Paranoia
https://www.simplypsychology.org/conformity.html
What Is Conformity? Definition, Types, Psychology Research
什么是Conformity？定义、类型、心理学研究
Updated on une 15, 2023
Reviewed byOlivia Guy-Evans, MSc
On This Page:
Conformity is a type of social influence involving a change in belief or behavior in order to fit in with a group.
从众是一种社会影响，个体遵从并顺从群体的信仰和行为。
This change is in response to real (involving the physical presence of others) or imagined (involving the pressure of social norms/expectations) group pressure.
这种遵从和顺从是对实实在在的（群体的存在）或意念（来自社会规范/期望的压力）的群体压力的响应。
Conformity can also be simply defined as “ yielding to group pressures” (Crutchfield, 1955). Group pressure may take different forms, for example bullying, persuasion, teasing, criticism, etc. Conformity is also known as majority influence (or group pressure).
从众也可以简单地定义为“屈服于群体压力”（Crutchfield，1955）。群体压力可能采取不同的形式，例如欺凌、说服、嘲笑、批评等。从众或顺从也被称为多数人影响（或群体压力）。
The term conformity is often used to indicate an agreement to the majority position, brought about either by a desire to ‘ fit in ’ or be liked (normative) or because of a desire to be correct (informational), or simply to conform to a social role (identification).
从众通常用于表示对多数立场的认同，这要么是使自己被喜欢（融入群体的规范），要么是要站在正确的一边（源于信息性），或者仅仅是为了符合自己在社会扮演的角色（站队，身份认同）。
Jenness (1932) was the first psychologist to study conformity. His experiment was an ambiguous situation involving a glass bottle filled with beans.
Jenness（1932）是第一位研究从众心理的心理学家。他的实验是一个模棱两可的情况，涉及一个装满豆子的玻璃瓶。
He asked participants individually to estimate how many beans the bottle contained. Jenness then put the group in a room with the bottle and asked them to provide a group estimate through discussion.
他要求参与者分别估计瓶子里装了多少豆子。然后，Jenness将小组和这个瓶子放在一个房间里，并要求他们通过讨论提供小组评估。
Participants were then asked to estimate the number on their own again to find whether their initial estimates had altered based on the influence of the majority.
然后，参与者被要求再次自行估计数量，以确定他们的原始估计是否因大多数人的影响而改变。
Jenness then interviewed the participants individually again and asked if they would like to change their original estimates or stay with the group’s estimate. Almost all changed their individual guesses to be closer to the group estimate.
Jenness随后再次询问了参与者，问他们是否愿意改变最初的估计以便与小组的估计一致。几乎所有人都改变了他们的个人猜测，以更接近群体估计。
However, perhaps the most famous conformity experiment was by Solomon Asch (1951) and his line judgment experiment.
然而，也许最著名的从众实验是Solomon Asch（1951）和他的直线判断实验。
Types of Conformity
从众类型
Kelman (1958) distinguished between three different types of conformity:
Kelman（1958）区分了三种不同的从众类型：
Compliance (or group acceptance)
合规性（或团体接受度）
This occurs “when an individual accepts influence because he hopes to achieve a favorable reaction from another person or group. He adopts the induced behavior because….he expects to gain specific rewards or approval and avoid specific punishment or disapproval by conformity” (Kelman, 1958, p. 53).
当一个人受到群体影响，因为他希望从其他人或团体那里获得有利的反馈。他采取了群体诱导的行为是因为……他希望通过从众获得奖励或认可，或避免惩罚或不认可”（Kelman，1958，第53页）。
In other words, conforming to the majority (publicly) in spite of not really agreeing with them (privately). This is seen in Asch’s line experiment.
换句话说，尽管（私下）并不真正同意他们，但（公开）还是服从了大多数人。这可以在Asch的线实验中看到。
Compliance stops when there are no group pressures to conform and is, therefore, a temporary behavior change.
当没有群体压力时，这种合规式从众就会停止，因此，这是一种暂时的行为。
Internalization (genuine acceptance of group norms)
立场的从众化（真正接受群体规范）
This occurs “when an individual accepts influence because the content of the induced behavior – the ideas and actions of which it is composed – is intrinsically rewarding. He adopts the induced behavior because it is congruent [consistent] with his value system” (Kelman, 1958, p. 53).
因为诱导从众的内容——它所包含的思想和行为——本质上对从众者有利。他从众的行为是因为群体价值取向与他的价值体系相一致”（Kelman，1958，第53页）。
Internalization always involves public and private conformity. A person publicly changes their behavior to fit in with the group while also agreeing with them privately.
立场的从众的个人和群体是一致的。立场的从众公开认同群体观念，同时私下里他们也同意群体的观点。
This is the deepest level of conformity, where the beliefs of the group become part of the individual’s own belief system. This means the change in behavior is permanent. This is seen in Sherif’s autokinetic experiment.
这是最深度的从众，群体的信仰成为个人信仰体系的一部分。这意味着个体行为坚定地站在群体的一边。这可以在Sherif的自动运动实验中看到。
This is most likely to occur when the majority has greater knowledge and members of the minority have little knowledge to challenge the majority’s position.
当多数人有更多的知识，而少数人几乎没有知识来挑战多数人的立场时，这种情况最有可能发生。
Identification (or group membership)
站队从众（或团体成员资格）
This occurs “when an individual accepts influence because he wants to establish or maintain a satisfying self-defining relationship to another person or group” (Kelman, 1958, p. 53).
当一个人接受群体影响，因为他想与另一个人或团体建立或维持一种理想的关系时，就会发生这种情况（Kelman，1958，第53页）。
Individuals conform to the expectations of a social role, e.g., nurses and police officers.
人在社会中充当的角色要求站队从众，例如护士和警察。
It is similar to compliance as there does not have to be a change in private opinion. A good example is Zimbardo’s Prison Study.
这类似于合规，因为这不是个人观点决定的从众。津巴多的《监狱研究》就是一个很好的例子。
Man (1969) identified an additional type of conformity:
Man（1969）发现了另一种类型的从众：
Ingratiational
趋利型从众
This is when a person conforms to impress or gain favor/acceptance from other people.
为了给别人留下深刻印象或获得别人的青睐/接受而从众。
It is similar to normative influence but is motivated by the need for social rewards rather than the threat of rejection, i.e., group pressure does not enter the decision to conform.
它类似于规范性从众，但其动机为了得到社会的奖励，而不是因为感到压力或威胁，即这种从众不是因为群体压力的结果。
Why Do People Conform?
人们为什么从众？
Deutsch and Gerrard (1955) identified two reasons why people conform:
Deutsch和Gerrard（1955）指出了人们从众的两个原因：
Normative Conformity
规范型从众
· Yielding to group pressure because a person wants to fit in with the group. E.g., Asch Line Study.
为了融入群体屈服于群体压力，例如，Asch线研究。
· Conforming because the person is scared of being rejected by the group.
因为害怕被群体拒绝而从众。
· This type of conformity usually involves compliance – where a person publicly accepts the views of a group but privately rejects them.
顺从：公开场合接受群体的观点，但私下拒绝。
Informational Conformity
信息从众
· This usually occurs when a person lacks knowledge and looks to the group for guidance.
这通常发生在一个人缺乏知识并向团队寻求指导时。
· Or when a person is in an ambiguous (i.e., unclear) situation and socially compares their behavior with the group. E.g., Sherif’s Study.
当一个人处于不太明晰的情况下，会将他们的行为与群体行为靠近。例如，Sherif的研究。
· This type of conformity usually involves internalization – where a person accepts the views of the groups and adopts them as an individual.
利益从众：因为群体的观点与个人利益一致。
Conformity Examples
从众示例
Sherif (1935) Autokinetic Effect Experiment
Sherif（1935）自动效应实验
Aim: Sherif (1935) conducted an experiment with the aim of demonstrating that people conform to group norms when they are put in an ambiguous (i.e., unclear) situation.
Sherif（1935）进行了一项实验，旨在证明当人们处于模糊（即不清楚）的情况下时，他们会遵守群体规范。
Method: Sherif used a lab experiment to study conformity. He used the autokinetic effect – this is where a small spot of light (projected onto a screen) in a dark room will appear to move even though it is still (i.e., it is a visual illusion).
方法：Sherif采用实验研究从众心理。他使用了自动效应——这是在黑暗的房间里，一个小光点（投影到屏幕上）即使静止，也会看起来在移动（即，这是一种视觉错觉）。
It was discovered that when participants were individually tested, their estimates of how far the light moved varied considerably (e.g., from 20cm to 80cm).
研究发现，当参与者单独接受测试时，他们对光线移动距离的估计差异很大（例如，从20cm到80cm）。
The participants were then tested in groups of three. Sherif manipulated the composition of the group by putting together two people whose estimate of the light movement when alone was very similar and one person whose estimate was very different. Each person in the group had to say aloud how far they thought the light had moved.
然后，参与者被分成三组进行测试。Sherif通过将个人单独时对光运动的估计非常相似的两个人和估计非常不同的一个人组成三人小组。小组中的每个人都必须大声说出他们认为光已经移动了多远。
Results: Sherif found that over numerous estimates (trials) of the movement of light, the group converged to a common estimate. The person whose estimate of movement was greatly different from the other two in the group conformed to the view of the other two.
结果：Sherif发现，在对光运动的众多估计（试验）中，该小组得出了一个共同的估计。对运动的估计与小组中的其他两人有很大不同的人更改自己的评估以便与其他两人的观点一致。
Sherif said that this showed that people would always tend to conform. Rather than make individual judgments, they tend to come to a group agreement.
Sherif说，这表明人们总是倾向于从众。他们倾向于遵守集体共识，而不是做出自己的判断。
Conclusion : The results show that when in an ambiguous situation (such as the autokinetic effect), a person will look to others (who know more / better) for guidance (i.e., adopt the group norm). They want to do the right thing but may lack the appropriate information. Observing others can provide this information. This is known as informational conformity.
结论：结果表明，当处于模糊的情况下（如自主运动效应），一个人会向其他人（权威）寻求指导（即采用群体规范）。他们想做正确的事，但缺乏适当的信息。观察他人可以提供这些信息。这被称为信息从众。
Non Conformity
非从众心理
Not everyone conforms to social pressure. Indeed, there are many factors that contribute to an individual’s desire to remain independent of the group.
并非每个人都屈从社会压力。事实上，有许多因素促使个人希望保持不同于群体的共识。
For example, Smith and Bond (1998) discovered cultural differences in conformity between western and eastern countries. People from Western cultures (such as America and the UK) are more likely to be individualistic and don’t want to be seen as being the same as everyone else.
例如，Smith和Bond（1998）发现了东西方国家在从众心理方面的文化差异。来自西方文化（如美国和英国）的人更有可能是个人主义者，不想被视为与其他人一样。
This means that they value being independent and self-sufficient (the individual is more important than the group) and, as such, are more likely to participate in non-conformity.
这意味着一些人重视独立和认为个人比群体更重要，他们更有可能不从众。
In contrast, eastern cultures (such as Asian countries) are more likely to value the needs of the family and other social groups before their own. They are known as collectivist cultures and are more likely to conform.
相比之下，东方文化（如亚洲国家）更有可能把家庭和其他社会群体的需求放在自己的需求的前头。他们被称为集体主义文化，更有可能从众。
References
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men. Pittsburg, PA: Carnegie Press.
Crutchfield, R. (1955). Conformity and Character. American Psychologist, 10, 191-198.
Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The journal of abnormal and social psychology, 51(3), 629.
Jenness, A. (1932). The role of discussion in changing opinion regarding a matter of fact. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 27, 279-296.
Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization: three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2, 51–60.
Mann, L (1969). Social Psychology. New York: Wiley.
Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Archives of Psychology, 27(187) .
Smith, P. B., & Bond, M. H. (1993). Social Psychology Across Cultures: Analysis and Perspectives. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Reviewer
Author
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Associate Editor for Simply Psychology
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
2 Confirmation Bias
https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-confirmation-bias-2795024
What Is Confirmation Bias?
Cherrypicking the facts to support an existing belief
什么是确Confirmation偏执？
挑选事实来支持先入的信念
By
---------------
Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."
--------------
Learn about our editorial process
Updated on May 19, 2024
Reviewed by
Verywell / Daniel Fishel
Table of Contents
0 seconds of 41 secondsVolume 0%
Confirmation bias is a type of cognitive bias that favors information that confirms your previously existing beliefs or biases.
Confirmation偏执是一种认知偏执，它倾向于坚持你之前存在的信念或偏见。
译者注：“Confirmation偏执”没有恰当的中文翻译。之前存在的信念往往来自主流权威或主流共识。
不用自己的大脑思考而固执于主流认同的观念可以定义为从众偏执。
For example, imagine that Mary believes left-handed people are more creative than right-handed people. Whenever Mary encounters a left-handed, creative person, she will place greater importance on this "evidence" because it supports what she already believes. Mary might even seek proof that further backs up this belief while discounting examples that don't support the idea.
假设玛丽认为左撇子比右撇子更有创造力。每当玛丽遇到一个有创造力的左撇子时，她都会更加重视这个“证据”，因为它支持她已经相信的东西。玛丽甚至可能会寻求进一步支持这一观点的证据，同时排除不支持这一想法的例子。
Confirmation biases affect not only how we gather information but also how we interpret and recall it. For example, people who support or oppose a particular issue will not only seek information to support it, but they will also interpret news stories in a way that upholds their existing ideas. They will also remember details in a way that reinforces these attitudes.
Confirmation偏执不仅影响我们收集信息的方式，还影响我们解释和回忆信息的方式。例如，支持或反对某个特定问题的人不仅会寻求信息来支持它，还会以支持他们现有观点的方式解释新近的故事。他们倾向于记住支持这种偏执的论证细节。
History of Confirmation Bias
Confirmation偏执的历史
The idea behind the confirmation bias has been observed by philosophers and writers since ancient times. In the 1960s, cognitive psychologist Peter Wason conducted several experiments known as Wason's rule discovery task. He demonstrated that people tend to seek information that confirms their existing beliefs.
哲学家和作家很早就观知道confirmation偏执背后的东西。在20世纪60年代，认知心理学家Peter Wason进行了几项实验，称为Wason的规则发现任务。他证明，人们倾向于寻求信息证实他们现有的信仰。
Signs of Confirmation Bias
Confirmation偏执的标志
When it comes to confirmation bias, there are often signs that a person is inadvertently or consciously falling victim to it. Unfortunately, it can also be very subtle and difficult to spot. Some of these signs that might help you identify when you or someone else is experiencing this bias include:
人们往往无意中或有意识地成为confirmation偏执的受害者。不幸的是，这种情况又可能是非常微妙的、很难被发现的。下述迹象可能有助于你识别自己或他人何时正在经历这种偏执：
Only seeking out information that confirms your beliefs and ignoring or discredit information that doesn't support them.
只寻找证实你的信仰的信息，而忽略或诋毁不支持你信仰的信息。
Looking for evidence that confirms what you already think is true, rather than considering all of the evidence available.
寻找证据来证实你已经认为是正确的东西，而不是全面考虑各种证据。
Relying on stereotypes or personal biases when assessing information.
在评估信息时刻板地依赖自己根深蒂固的概念或个人偏见。
Selectively remembering information that supports your views while forgetting or discounting information that doesn't.
有选择地记住支持你观点的信息，而忘记或忽略不支持你观点的信息。
Having a strong emotional reaction to information (positive or negative) that confirms your beliefs, while remaining relatively unaffected by information that doesn't.
对支持你信念的信息（积极或消极）情有独钟，而对于不支持的信息比较麻木。
Types of Confirmation Bias
Confirmation偏执的类型
There are a few different types of confirmation bias that can occur. Some of the most common include the following:
Confirmation偏执有不同的类型。一些最常见的类型包括：
Biased attention: This is when we selectively focus on information that confirms our views while ignoring or discounting data that doesn't.
偏执的注意力：这是指我们有选择地关注证实我们观点的信息，而忽略或低估不符合我们观点的数据。
Biased interpretation: This is when we consciously interpret information in a way that confirms our beliefs.
偏执的解释：这是指我们愿意以证实我们信仰的方式解释信息。
Biased memory: This is when we selectively remember information that supports our views while forgetting or discounting information that doesn't.
记忆偏执：这是指我们有选择地记住支持我们观点的信息，而忘记或忽略不支持我们的信息。
Examples of the Confirmation Bias
Confirmation偏执示例
It can be helpful to consider a few examples of how confirmation bias works in everyday life to get a better idea of the effects and impact it may have.
考虑Confirmation偏执的常见例子可能帮助你更好地了解Confirmation偏执的可能影响。
Interpretations of Current Issues
对当前问题的解释
One of the most common examples of confirmation bias is how we seek out or interpret news stories. We are more likely to believe a story if it confirms our pre-existing views, even if the evidence presented is shaky or inconclusive. For example, if we support a particular political candidate, we are more likely to believe news stories that paint them in a positive light while discounting or ignoring those that are critical.
Confirmation偏执最常见的例子可以从我们寻找什么样的事件或如何解释事件到得。如果一个实践支持我们之前的观点，我们更有可能相信它，即使所提供的证据是不可靠或不确定的。例如，如果我们支持某个特定的政治候选人，我们更可能相信那些美化这个候选人的报道，而忽略或忽略那些批评的报道。
Consider the debate over gun control:
以枪支管制的争论为例：
Let's say Sally is in support of gun control. She seeks out news stories and opinion pieces that reaffirm the need for limitations on gun ownership. When she hears stories about shootings in the media, she interprets them in a way that supports her existing beliefs.
假设萨莉支持枪支管制。她寻找新闻报道和观点文章，重申限制枪支的必要性。当她在媒体上听到枪击事件的故事时，她会以一种支持她现有信仰的方式来解读这些故事。
Henry, on the other hand, is adamantly opposed to gun control. He seeks out news sources that are aligned with his position. When he comes across news stories about shootings, he interprets them in a way that supports his current point of view.
另一方面，亨利坚决反对枪支管制。他寻找与自己立场一致的新闻来源。当他看到有关枪击事件的新闻报道时，他会以一种支持他目前观点的方式来解读它们。
These two people have very different opinions on the same subject, and their interpretations are based on their beliefs. Even if they read the same story, their bias shapes how they perceive the details, further confirming their beliefs.
这两个人对同一个主题有着截然不同的看法，他们的解释是基于他们的信仰。即使他们读的是同一个故事，他们的偏执也会影响他们对细节的看法，用来进一步证实他们的信念。
Personal Relationships
人际关系
Another example of confirmation bias can be seen in the way we choose friends and partners. We are more likely to be attracted to and befriend people who share our same beliefs and values, and less likely to associate with those who don't. This can lead to an echo chamber effect, where we only ever hear information that confirms our views and never have our opinions challenged.
从众偏执的另一个例子可以从我们选择朋友和伴侣的方式中看出。我们更有可能被那些与我们有着相同信仰和价值观的人所吸引，并与他们交朋友，而不太可能与那些不认同我们的人交往。这可能会导致正反馈效应，在这种效应中，我们只会听到支持我们观点的信息，而不会让我们的观点受到质疑。
Decision-Making
决策
The confirmation bias can often lead to bad decision-making. For example, if we are convinced that a particular investment is good, we may ignore warning signs that it might not be. Or, if we are set on getting a job with a particular company, we may not consider other opportunities that may be better suited for us.
从众偏执往往会导致糟糕的决策。例如，如果我们确信某项投资是好的，我们可能会忽略不利于该项目警告信号。或者，如果我们决心在某家公司找到工作，我们可能不会考虑其他可能更适合我们的机会。
Impact of the Confirmation Bias
Confirmation偏执的影响
The confirmation bias happens due to the natural way the brain works, so eliminating it is impossible. While it is often discussed as a negative tendency that impairs logic and decisions, it isn't always bad. The confirmation bias can significantly impact our lives, both positively and negatively. On the positive side, it can help us stay confident in our beliefs and values and give us a sense of certainty and security.
无论是积极的还是消极的，Confirmation偏执会对我们的生活产生重大影响。从众偏执是由于大脑的自然工作方式造成的，因此不可能消灭它。虽然它经常损害逻辑思维和决策，有时可能也不是坏事。从积极的一面来看，它可以帮助我们对自己的信仰和价值观保持信心，并给我们一种确定感和安全感。
Unfortunately, this type of bias can prevent us from looking at situations objectively. It can also influence our decisions and lead to poor or faulty choices.
不幸的是，这种偏见会妨碍我们客观地看待情况。它也会影响我们的决定，导致糟糕或错误的选择。
During an election season, for example, people tend to seek positive information that paints their favored candidates in a good light. They will also look for information that casts the opposing candidate in a negative light.
例如，在选举季，人们倾向于寻求赞美他们所喜欢的候选人的积极信息。他们还将寻找对方候选人的负面信息。
By not seeking objective facts, interpreting information in a way that only supports their existing beliefs, and remembering details that uphold these beliefs, they often miss important information. These details and facts might have influenced their decision on which candidate to support.
由于不客观，仅仅以只支持他们现有信念的方式解释信息，并支持这些信念的细节对他们长久记忆，他们经常错过重要信息。这些细节和事实可能决定他们支持哪位候选人。
面对正确和错误的审稿意见，编辑经常选用错误的审稿意见。
There's a Reason Even The Smartest People Fall For Scams
即使是最聪明的人也会上当受骗
How to Overcome the Confirmation Bias
如何克服Confirmation偏执
There are a few different ways that we can try to overcome confirmation bias:
有几种不同的方法可以克服confirmation偏执：
Be aware of the signs that you may be falling victim to it. This includes being aware of your personal biases and how they might be influencing your decision-making.
小心你成为confirmation偏执受害者。这包括意识到你的个人偏执以及它们可能影响你的决策。
Consider all the evidence available, rather than just the evidence confirming your views.
考虑所有可用的证据，而不仅仅是支持你的观点的证据。
Seek out different perspectives, especially from those who hold opposing views.
寻求不同的观点，尤其是那些持相反意见的人的观点。
Be willing to change your mind in light of new evidence, even if it means updating or even changing your current beliefs.
愿意根据新的证据改变主意，即使这意味着修正甚至改变你目前的信念。
Confirmation Bias: The Takeaway
Confirmation偏执：教训
Unfortunately, all humans are prone to confirmation bias. Even if you believe you are very open-minded and consider the facts before coming to conclusions, some bias likely shapes your opinion. Combating this natural tendency is difficult.
不幸的是， 所有人们都容易产生confirmation偏执。即使你认为自己思想开放，你认为你在得出结论之前考虑了事实，你仍然可能已经被偏见影响了你的观点。对抗这种偏执并不容易。
However, knowing about confirmation bias and accepting its existence can help you recognize it. Be curious about opposing views and listen to what others have to say and why. This can help you see issues and beliefs from other perspectives.
然而，了解confirmation偏执并接受其存在可以帮助你认识它。对相反的观点保持好奇，听听别人怎么说以及为什么这样说。这可以帮助你从其他角度看待问题和信仰。
Signs of Different Types of Biases and How to Overcome Each of Them
不同类型偏执的迹象以及如何克服各种不同的偏执
Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."
============================
允许颠覆主流理论的人在期刊上讲话，即使颠覆错了，天也塌不下来
在科学上，多数人的错误（无论是学术上的还是学术道德上的），能不能纠正
允许颠覆主流理论的人在期刊上讲话，即使颠覆错了，天也塌不下来
Science、Nature不是顶刊，发表颠覆性创新文章最多的期刊才能称得上是顶刊
大量编辑部缺乏具体证据的“稿件内容不够重要”的初审拒稿是不负责任、是学术歧视、是学术不端
如果一篇文章，引用了预印本平台的文章，那么这篇文章大概率值得一读
相当多的学术权威不是因为学术而权威，他们靠造假发表垃圾文章污染学术而成为学术权威
现代学界怎么了，为什么大家都热衷于切磋如何讨好审稿人，为什么不把力量用在做学问上
非常不专业的审稿意见：拒稿不是针对稿件的主要论证，而是根据前言背景拒稿
一方面，颠覆错误的现行理论的文章很难发表，另一方面顶刊发表文章的（低级）错误从来不被发现
实践反复证明：期刊同行评审很难发现文章中的低级错误，但是能高效阻止新思想的传播（给出最新实例）
期刊同行评审:发现稿件错误很低效，不让颠覆性创新正确稿件发表效率很高
上海交通大学杨枫教授：如果学术界是个草台班子，那就一定有草包
对于任何领域的科学研究，研究者的知识视野不能仅仅局限于单一的一个领域
给不出学术理由，以“我不相信理论会随便的就出错”为依据拒稿是学术不端
对于颠覆主流科学家观点的稿件，无论怎么写，通常都不可能通过期刊同行评审
在错误的语言体系中呆久了的主流科学家不能理解正确语言体系中的语言表达和逻辑思维
对于大多数主流权威犯的浅显而严重的错误视而不见是现代科学界的一个严重问题
在科学上，多数人的错误（无论是学术上的还是学术道德上的），能不能纠正
Vazire, S., 2020. A toast to the error detectors. Nature. 577, 9.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-03909-2
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-3589443-1468835.html
上一篇：以开放的心态面对反对观点，正视自己的错误
下一篇：正是怀疑一切的思维方式，使我认识到人类能够取得绝对正确的理论认知
22 刘进平 王涛 王从彦 黄德民 宁利中 杨正瓴 孙颉 钟炳 雒运强 尤明庆 杜占池 高宏 郑永军 朱晓刚 韦玉川 陆仲绩 钱大鹏 窦华书 王安良 崔锦华 李毅伟 朱林
该博文允许注册用户评论 请点击登录 评论 (4 个评论)
1/1 | 总计:2 | 首页 | 上一页 | 下一页 | 末页 | 跳转 |