Gönüllü ol
Kaynakça

Bilim kaynakları.

Her deney yayımlanmış bir çalışmaya dayanıyor. Sayıları ve künyeleri kaynağından kontrol ettik; tartışmalı ya da tekrarlanamamış bulguları deney sayfalarında ayrıca belirtiyoruz.

EXP. 002 · Aklına gelen ilk sayıSayı

  1. Kubovy, M., & Psotka, J. (1976). The predominance of seven and the apparent spontaneity of numerical choices. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(2), 291–294. ↗
  2. Simon, W. E. (1971). Number and color responses of some college students: Preliminary evidence for a "blue seven phenomenon". Perceptual and Motor Skills, 33(2), 373–374. ↗
  3. Veritasium [D. Muller] (2024, Mart). Why is this number everywhere? [Video]. YouTube. ↗
  4. Knowles, P. L. (1977). The "blue seven" is not a phenomenon. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 45(2), 648–650. ↗

EXP. 003 · Mavi mi, lacivert mi?Renk algısı

  1. Özgen, E., & Davies, I. R. L. (1998). Turkish color terms: Tests of Berlin and Kay's theory of color universals and linguistic relativity. Linguistics, 36(5), 919–956. ↗
  2. Berlin, B., & Kay, P. (1969). Basic color terms: Their universality and evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press. ↗
  3. Winawer, J., Witthoft, N., Frank, M. C., Wu, L., Wade, A. R., & Boroditsky, L. (2007). Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(19), 7780–7785. ↗
  4. Özgen, E., & Davies, I. R. L. (2002). Acquisition of categorical color perception: A perceptual learning approach to the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(4), 477–493. ↗
  5. Rätsep, K. (2018). Colour terms in Turkish, Estonian and Russian: How many basic blue terms are there? (Doktora tezi). University of Tartu. ↗
  6. Thierry, G., Athanasopoulos, P., Wiggett, A., Dering, B., & Kuipers, J.-R. (2009). Unconscious effects of language-specific terminology on preattentive color perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(11), 4567–4570. ↗

EXP. 004 · 10 saniyeyi hissetZaman algısı

  1. Wearden, J. H. (1991). Do humans possess an internal clock with scalar timing properties? Learning and Motivation, 22(1–2), 59–83. ↗
  2. Gibbon, J. (1977). Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing. Psychological Review, 84(3), 279–325. ↗
  3. Grondin, S., Ouellet, B., & Roussel, M.-È. (2004). Benefits and limits of explicit counting for discriminating temporal intervals. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(1), 1–12. ↗
  4. Rattat, A.-C., & Droit-Volet, S. (2012). What is the best and easiest method of preventing counting in different temporal tasks? Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 67–80. ↗
  5. Lejeune, H., & Wearden, J. H. (2009). Vierordt's The Experimental Study of the Time Sense (1868) and its legacy. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 941–960. ↗
  6. Glasauer, S., & Shi, Z. (2021). The origin of Vierordt's law: The experimental protocol matters. PsyCh Journal, 10(5), 732–741. ↗

EXP. 005 · Bouba mı, kiki mi?Ses ve şekil

  1. Köhler, W. (1929). Gestalt psychology. New York: Liveright. ↗
  2. Ramachandran, V. S., & Hubbard, E. M. (2001). Synaesthesia: A window into perception, thought and language. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8(12), 3–34. ↗
  3. Maurer, D., Pathman, T., & Mondloch, C. J. (2006). The shape of boubas: Sound–shape correspondences in toddlers and adults. Developmental Science, 9(3), 316–322. ↗
  4. Ćwiek, A., Fuchs, S., Draxler, C., Asu, E. L., Dediu, D., Hiovain, K., Kawahara, S., Koutalidis, S., Krifka, M., Lippus, P., Lupyan, G., Oh, G. E., Paul, J., Petrone, C., Ridouane, R., Reiter, S., Schümchen, N., Szalontai, Á., Ünal-Logacev, Ö., Zeller, J., Perlman, M., & Winter, B. (2022). The bouba/kiki effect is robust across cultures and writing systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 377(1841), 20200390. ↗
  5. Styles, S. J., & Gawne, L. (2017). When does maluma/takete fail? Two key failures and a meta-analysis suggest that phonology and phonotactics matter. i-Perception, 8(4), 2041669517724807. ↗
  6. Fort, M., & Schwartz, J.-L. (2022). Resolving the bouba-kiki effect enigma by rooting iconic sound symbolism in physical properties of round and spiky objects. Scientific Reports, 12, 19172. ↗

EXP. 006 · Kavanozda kaç şeker var?Tahmin

  1. Galton, F. (1907). Vox populi. Nature, 75(1949), 450–451. ↗
  2. Galton, F. (1907). The ballot-box. Nature, 75(1952), 509–510. ↗
  3. Lorenz, J., Rauhut, H., Schweitzer, F., & Helbing, D. (2011). How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(22), 9020–9025. ↗
  4. Kao, A. B., Berdahl, A. M., Hartnett, A. T., Lutz, M. J., Bak-Coleman, J. B., Ioannou, C. C., Giam, X., & Couzin, I. D. (2018). Counteracting estimation bias and social influence to improve the wisdom of crowds. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 15(141), 20180130. ↗
  5. Izard, V., & Dehaene, S. (2008). Calibrating the mental number line. Cognition, 106(3), 1221–1247. ↗
  6. Treynor, J. L. (1987). Market efficiency and the bean jar experiment. Financial Analysts Journal, 43(3), 50–53. ↗

EXP. 007 · Rengi söyle, kelimeyi değilDikkat

  1. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662. ↗
  2. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109(2), 163–203. ↗
  3. Augustinova, M., Parris, B. A., & Ferrand, L. (2019). The loci of Stroop interference and facilitation effects with manual and vocal responses. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1786. ↗
  4. Crump, M. J. C., McDonnell, J. V., & Gureckis, T. M. (2013). Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research. PLoS ONE, 8(3), e57410. ↗
  5. Hedge, C., Powell, G., & Sumner, P. (2018). The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences. Behavior Research Methods, 50(3), 1166–1186. ↗

EXP. 008 · Ne kadar hızlısın?Tepki

  1. Donders, F. C. (1969). On the speed of mental processes (W. G. Koster, Trans.). Acta Psychologica, 30, 412–431. (Orijinal çalışma 1868.) ↗
  2. Hick, W. E. (1952). On the rate of gain of information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 4(1), 11–26. ↗
  3. Hyman, R. (1953). Stimulus information as a determinant of reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45(3), 188–196. ↗
  4. Der, G., & Deary, I. J. (2006). Age and sex differences in reaction time in adulthood: Results from the United Kingdom Health and Lifestyle Survey. Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 62–73. ↗
  5. Woods, D. L., Wyma, J. M., Yund, E. W., Herron, T. J., & Reed, B. (2015). Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 131. (Yaşa göre seçimli tepki eğimi: Woods ve ark., 2015, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 193.) ↗
  6. Anwyl-Irvine, A., Dalmaijer, E. S., Hodges, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2021). Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices. Behavior Research Methods, 53(4), 1407–1425. Ayrıca: Pronk, T., Wiers, R. W., Molenkamp, B., & Murre, J. (2020). Mental chronometry in the pocket? Timing accuracy of web applications on touchscreen and keyboard devices. Behavior Research Methods, 52(3), 1371–1382. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01321-2 ↗

EXP. 009 · Yazı mı tura mı: rastgele olabilir misin?Rastgelelik

  1. Wagenaar, W. A. (1972). Generation of random sequences by human subjects: A critical survey of literature. Psychological Bulletin, 77(1), 65–72. ↗
  2. Falk, R., & Konold, C. (1997). Making sense of randomness: Implicit encoding as a basis for judgment. Psychological Review, 104(2), 301–318. ↗
  3. Nickerson, R. S. (2002). The production and perception of randomness. Psychological Review, 109(2), 330–357. ↗
  4. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 430–454. ↗
  5. Gauvrit, N., Zenil, H., Soler-Toscano, F., Delahaye, J.-P., & Brugger, P. (2017). Human behavioral complexity peaks at age 25. PLOS Computational Biology, 13(4), e1005408. ↗
  6. Neuringer, A. (1986). Can people behave “randomly?”: The role of feedback. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(1), 62–75. ↗

EXP. 010 · Hangi çizgi daha uzun?Görsel yanılsama

  1. Müller-Lyer, F. C. (1889). Optische Urtheilstäuschungen. Archiv für Physiologie, Supplement-Band, 263–270. ↗
  2. Segall, M. H., Campbell, D. T., & Herskovits, M. J. (1963). Cultural differences in the perception of geometric illusions. Science, 139(3556), 769–771. (Ayrıntılı rapor: The influence of culture on visual perception. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1966.) ↗
  3. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. ↗
  4. Gregory, R. L. (1963). Distortion of visual space as inappropriate constancy scaling. Nature, 199(4894), 678–680. ↗
  5. Howe, C. Q., & Purves, D. (2005). The Müller-Lyer illusion explained by the statistics of image–source relationships. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(4), 1234–1239. ↗
  6. Amir, D., & Firestone, C. (2025). Is visual perception WEIRD? The Müller-Lyer illusion and the cultural byproduct hypothesis. Psychological Review. Advance online publication. ↗

EXP. 011 · Linda problemiOlasılık

  1. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90(4), 293–315. ↗
  2. Hertwig, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (1999). The 'conjunction fallacy' revisited: How intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(4), 275–305. ↗
  3. Mellers, B., Hertwig, R., & Kahneman, D. (2001). Do frequency representations eliminate conjunction effects? An exercise in adversarial collaboration. Psychological Science, 12(4), 269–275. ↗
  4. Charness, G., Karni, E., & Levin, D. (2010). On the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: New experimental evidence regarding Linda. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(2), 551–556. ↗
  5. Chandrashekar, S. P., Cheng, Y. H., Fong, C. L., Leung, Y. C., Wong, Y. T., Cheng, B. L., & Feldman, G. (2021). Frequency estimation and semantic ambiguity do not eliminate conjunction bias, when it occurs: Replication and extension of Mellers, Hertwig, and Kahneman (2001). Meta-Psychology, 5. ↗

EXP. 012 · İki çerçeve, tek kararKarar

  1. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. ↗
  2. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291. ↗
  3. Kühberger, A. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75(1), 23–55. ↗
  4. Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149–188. ↗
  5. Klein, R. A., Ratliff, K. A., Vianello, M., Adams, R. B., Jr., Bahník, Š., Bernstein, M. J., … Nosek, B. A. (2014). Investigating variation in replicability: A "Many Labs" replication project. Social Psychology, 45(3), 142–152. ↗
  6. Kühberger, A. (2023). A systematic review of risky-choice framing effects. EXCLI Journal, 22, 1012–1031. ↗

EXP. 013 · Sopa ve topDüşünme

  1. Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42. ↗
  2. Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39(7), 1275–1289. ↗
  3. Brañas-Garza, P., Kujal, P., & Lenkei, B. (2019). Cognitive reflection test: Whom, how, when. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 82, 101455. ↗
  4. Haigh, M. (2016). Has the standard Cognitive Reflection Test become a victim of its own success? Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 12(3), 145–149. ↗
  5. Bialek, M., & Pennycook, G. (2018). The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures. Behavior Research Methods, 50(5), 1953–1959. ↗
  6. Stagnaro, M. N., Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2018). Performance on the Cognitive Reflection Test is stable across time. Judgment and Decision Making, 13(3), 260–267. ↗

EXP. 014 · Üç kapıOlasılık

  1. Selvin, S. (1975). A problem in probability [Letter to the editor]. The American Statistician, 29(1), 67. ↗
  2. Tierney, J. (1991, July 21). Behind Monty Hall's doors: Puzzle, debate and answer? The New York Times, p. 1. ↗
  3. Krauss, S., & Wang, X. T. (2003). The psychology of the Monty Hall problem: Discovering psychological mechanisms for solving a tenacious brain teaser. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(1), 3–22. ↗
  4. Herbranson, W. T., & Schroeder, J. (2010). Are birds smarter than mathematicians? Pigeons (Columba livia) perform optimally on a version of the Monty Hall Dilemma. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 124(1), 1–13. ↗
  5. Mazur, J. E., & Kahlbaugh, P. E. (2012). Choice behavior of pigeons (Columba livia), college students, and preschool children (Homo sapiens) in the Monty Hall dilemma. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126(4), 407–420. ↗
  6. Mueser, P. R., & Granberg, D. (1999). The Monty Hall dilemma revisited: Understanding the interaction of problem definition and decision making (Working paper). University of Missouri-Columbia / EconWPA. ↗

EXP. 015 · Paylaşır mısın?Adalet

  1. Güth, W., Schmittberger, R., & Schwarze, B. (1982). An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 3(4), 367–388. ↗
  2. Oosterbeek, H., Sloof, R., & van de Kuilen, G. (2004). Cultural differences in ultimatum game experiments: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Experimental Economics, 7(2), 171–188. ↗
  3. Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., & McElreath, R. (2001). In search of Homo economicus: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. American Economic Review, 91(2), 73–78. ↗
  4. Cameron, L. A. (1999). Raising the stakes in the ultimatum game: Experimental evidence from Indonesia. Economic Inquiry, 37(1), 47–59. ↗
  5. Andersen, S., Ertaç, S., Gneezy, U., Hoffman, M., & List, J. A. (2011). Stakes matter in ultimatum games. American Economic Review, 101(7), 3427–3439. ↗
  6. Sanfey, A. G., Rilling, J. K., Aronson, J. A., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. Science, 300(5626), 1755–1758. ↗

EXP. 016 · Ayna mı, değil mi?Uzamsal düşünme

  1. Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171(3972), 701–703. ↗
  2. Cooper, L. A., & Shepard, R. N. (1973). Chronometric studies of the rotation of mental images. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 75–176). Academic Press. ↗
  3. Quan, C., Li, C., Xue, J., Yue, J., & Zhang, C. (2017). Mirror-normal difference in the late phase of mental rotation: An ERP study. PLOS ONE, 12(9), e0184963. ↗
  4. Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117(2), 250–270. ↗
  5. Voyer, D. (2011). Time limits and gender differences on paper-and-pencil tests of mental rotation: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(2), 267–277. ↗
  6. Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402. ↗