SEMANTIC IMITABILITY IN THE PROCESS OF THINKING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/2312-8437.51.2023-1.10Keywords:
thinking, meaning, imitation, semantic imitation, paraphraseAbstract
The purpose of the work is to establish the empirical connection between semantic imitability and certain characteristics of the adolescents’ thinking. Semantic imitability is an optional phenomenon of discourse. With the help of imitation of another person’s thinking (paraphrase), the subject tries to get out of the dead ends of his own discourse, to paraphrase another person’s opinion in order to improve its understanding. A paraphrase creates connections in a thinking process that should be continuous, but without any additional or new meaning. The author’s “Method of text breaks” was used in the research. The sample consisted of 61 adolescents. The participants of the research were offered a text in which all paired sentences were omitted. The task was to create a story that makes sense. After completing the task, the sentences have been assessed. In particular, the sentences that have been qualified as a paraphrase of the previous or the following author’s sentence were singled out. Analysis of the research results aims at finding out the properties of semantic imitation. Such properties include 1) a decrease in the formation of the meaning of the story as a whole and in each of its parts (on the basis of correlation and linear regression analysis); 2) a weak direct correlation with samples of illogical (contradictory) (0.18) and amorphous (indeterminate) (0.17) opinion of the subjects, as well as an inverse correlation with crystallized (−0.37) and logical (−0.31) variants of meaning. The scientific novelty of the research shall be in the fact that the construct “semantic imitability” was analyzed and its place in the process of thinking activity was empirically determined. The conclusions are the provisions according to which semantic imitability should be considered as a manifestation of a discrete inability to form a semantic connection. This is a tactical alternative to semantic omissions. Obviously, its purpose is to try to rephrase the condition of the problem in such a way that it becomes the starting point for the further thinking process.
References
Мазяр О.В. Валідність психологічного дослідження: математика абсурду. Актуальні проблеми психології : збірник наукових праць Інституту психології імені Г. С. Костюка НАПН України. Т. VI : Психологія обдарованості. Випуск 15. Київ-Житомир : Вид-во ЖДУ ім. І. Франка, 2019. С. 237–244.
Мазяр О.В. Мовлення та мислення у концептуальних поглядах Л. С. Виготського. Психологія людини: Л. С. Виготський та сучасна наука : Збірник статей за редакцією М. В. Папучі. Випуск 2–3. Ніжин : НДУ ім. М. Гоголя, 2020. С. 175–192.
Мазяр О.В. Особистісний дисонанс: системний аналіз : монографія. Житомир : Видавець О. О. Євенок, 2020. 332 с.
Acar S., Runco M.A. Divergent thinking: New methods, recent research, and extended theory. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2019. Vol. 13(2). Р. 153–158.
Andrews-Hanna J.R., Woo C.-W., Wilcox R., Eisenbarth H., Kim B., Han J., Losin E.A.R., Wager T.D. The conceptual building blocks of everyday thought: Tracking the emergence and dynamics of ruminative and nonruminative thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2022. Vol. 151(3). Р. 628–642.
Dumas D., Organisciak P., Doherty M. Measuring divergent thinking originality with human raters and textmining models: A psychometric comparison of methods. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2021, Vol. 15(4). Р. 645–663.
Flora D.B. Thinking about effect sizes: From the replication crisis to a cumulative psychological science. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne. 2020. Vol. 61(4). Р. 318–330.
Kao C.-Y. Examining the attribute inheritance in Janusian thinking: An intensional study on the mechanisms of combining opposite concepts. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2023. Jan 02.
Moore D.A. Overprecision is a property of thinking systems. Psychological Review. 2022. May 05.
Open Science Collaboration. An Open, Large-Scale, Collaborative Effort to Estimate the Reproducibility of Psychological Science. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2012. 7(6).
Open Science Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015. 349(6251), aac4716. Doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716.
Petroviс M.B., Žeželj I. Thinking inconsistently: Development and validation of an instrument for assessing proneness to doublethink. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 2022. Vol. 38(6), Р. 463–475.
Zeitlen D.C., Silvia P.J., Kane M.J., Beaty R.E. The creative mind in daily life: How cognitive and affective experiences relate to creative thinking and behavior. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2022. Dec. 15.