Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2023 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Vieira, Thomas Endriggo Ramos
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Azoubel, Marcos Spector
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Psicologia Experimental: Análise do Comportamento
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e da Saúde
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/32552
|
Resumo: |
Members of scientific communities operate in different ways to produce scientific knowledge. One of the possibilities is the production of theories about its object of investigation. The term “theory” can assume different meanings, one of which is equivalent to what can be described as explaining. Such theories must have as their main feature to allow effective action on the events of the world to those who are under its control. This makes it important to identify the types of contingencies responsible for different ways of explaining phenomena. For this, this study aimed to verify the effect of the observation time of the formation of a discrimination by a character on the explanations regarding his behavior. The procedure consisted of showing a video to the participants, in which the character had to emit responses by touching the screen of a tablet to one of the available buttons ('yes' and 'no'), in front of geometric figures with different dimensions. Such a response could produce two consequences: a screen with a green light, indicating success, or a blank screen, indicating error. The participants of this study were divided into four groups (Groups 1, 2, 3 and Control) and each one of them had different observation times before issuing the first explanation (Group 1: access to 1/4 of the total time of the video; Group 2: 2/4 of the total time; Group 3: 3/4 of the total time; Control Group: full access). Groups 1, 2 and 3 were asked, at the end of the video, to issue a second explanation. With this, it was possible to verify the effect of requesting a hasty explanation, with different xvi periods of observation, on the final explanation, after observing the entire story responsible for the character's discriminative response. Due to an unprogrammed condition in the initial procedure, the research participants gave explanations about another character's response, the one that occurred in the face of the consequences for the initially programmed response. This second response produced the next attempt as a consequence. For this reason, the first response was called response 1 (R1) and the second, response 2 (R2). Comparisons between them allowed observing the effect of the complexity of the contingency involved on the explanations. The results showed that a longer observation time before the first explanation produced an increase in the types of explanation provided, which may have occurred due to the complexity of the task presented. The comparison between the contingencies of R1 and R2 suggest that the discriminability of the contingency has effects on the types of explanation, with observable externalist explanations being more likely in simpler contingencies and explanations with internalist elements in more complex contingencies |
