有一間看來生意不太好的店舖老板，好像是我，因為一次去某朋友家時，要越過一大堆訓練有素的犬隻，他/她是在一個正方形的村中的其中一角，他/她的兩隻犬懂得自動引領客人到指定的地方，就得到了靈感，要同樣訓練我的貓兒做同樣的事，於是就似乎在一小小的地方，有一盆水之類的東西，而電子控制水的流向來影響貓的行為，再用貓來招待客人。原理好像是客人來到某處就觸發系統，於是直流向下的水柱在下方變成斜流，另外就一早用行為治療的方式令貓學習了水柱代表了食物或者什麼獎勵似的(conditional stimulate)，於是貓受了此刺激，就自動自覺走去「招呼」客人，這可謂行為心理學的一個實際應用。
Once when I want to reach a friend in a square field, I was granted(greeted) by two well trained dog and surrounded by main(more) dogs. So when I own a noodle shop I am inspired by that incident to train my cat in a similar fashion since my professional training is in the area of Psychology. However, I love to do things in a more complex way to demonstrate my intellectual prowess so I first train the cat using behavioural technique to respond to certain conditional stimulate in predicted fashion, then I program the computer in the shop to respond to the customer by redirecting a beam of water sideway in the bottom. Once the cat receive the signal, then it will attracted by the water to go there and act in certain fashion which the customer would think that is a welcoming/greeting by the cat.
2008年10月6日 星期一
Methodology issue of Evolutionary Psychology
From my last discussion of the theoretical issues of evolution as a hypothesis to be tested, it follows that any disciple derivative from it would suffer from the same issue. This is an example I remembered from the heyday of my Psychology class in University: It is about the idea of biological preparedness for learning in Behaviorism, the central tenet is that Phobic is a sort of evolutionary ‘leftover’. Therefore it is easy to learned and difficult to unlearn. Which to me it seems to implied part of causation chain is in the genes.
How to prove this assertion? That is the part make this example so memorable. The method is to ask ‘experts’ to judge how each phobic is related to the level of danger posed to human five thousand years ago. Thus, follow this strange logic, no wonder human is so easily to acquire fear of height, fear of snake, fear of spider! Because some of our ancestor has suffer from them therefore develop an inborn preparedness to learn to fear them. It is adaptive(during that time) to born with tendency for the fear of them since they will increase your chance of survival.
Does it sound like circular logic to you? My feeling at the time is: That is certainly a circular logic. How can anyone setup an experiment to test this ‘hypothesis’? Can anyone setup a null hypothesis to test against it? How can anyone to have an experiment to falsify this hypothesis? If this hypothesis is right, you certainly can’t find another human that doesn’t have this inborn tendency.(If this hypothesis is wrong, how can you distinguish it from other?) What can five or tend ‘expert’ judge give us useful information on the past? At least, we require anthropologist to test if the native who live in a native environment who are also born with these tendencies. Otherwise, how can we know for sure? Evolution is a retrospective science, thus by nature, it is difficult to assure of its internal validity, so do Evolutionary Psychology.
How to prove this assertion? That is the part make this example so memorable. The method is to ask ‘experts’ to judge how each phobic is related to the level of danger posed to human five thousand years ago. Thus, follow this strange logic, no wonder human is so easily to acquire fear of height, fear of snake, fear of spider! Because some of our ancestor has suffer from them therefore develop an inborn preparedness to learn to fear them. It is adaptive(during that time) to born with tendency for the fear of them since they will increase your chance of survival.
Does it sound like circular logic to you? My feeling at the time is: That is certainly a circular logic. How can anyone setup an experiment to test this ‘hypothesis’? Can anyone setup a null hypothesis to test against it? How can anyone to have an experiment to falsify this hypothesis? If this hypothesis is right, you certainly can’t find another human that doesn’t have this inborn tendency.(If this hypothesis is wrong, how can you distinguish it from other?) What can five or tend ‘expert’ judge give us useful information on the past? At least, we require anthropologist to test if the native who live in a native environment who are also born with these tendencies. Otherwise, how can we know for sure? Evolution is a retrospective science, thus by nature, it is difficult to assure of its internal validity, so do Evolutionary Psychology.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)