David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Mind and Society 11 (1):27-40 (2012)
In recent years, the psychology of reasoning has been undergoing a paradigm shift, with general Bayesian, probabilistic approaches replacing the older, much more restricted binary logic paradigm. At the same time, dual processing theories have been gaining influence. We argue that these developments should be integrated and moreover that such integration is already underway. The new reasoning paradigm should be grounded in dual processing for its algorithmic level of analysis just as it uses Bayesian theory for its computational level of analysis. Moreover, we propose that, within the new paradigm, these levels of analysis reflect on each other. Bayesianism suggests a specific theoretical understanding of dual processing. Just as importantly, the duality in processing carries over to duality in function; although both types of processes compute degrees of belief, they generate different functions.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Thomas S. Kuhn (1996/2012). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2007). Bayesian Rationality: The Probabilistic Approach to Human Reasoning. OUP Oxford.
Noam Chomsky (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. The MIT Press.
P. N. Johnson-Laird & Ruth M. J. Byrne (1991). Deduction. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
Dorothy Edgington (1995). On Conditionals. Mind 104 (414):235-329.
Citations of this work BETA
Ulf Hlobil (2016). Chains of Inferences and the New Paradigm in the Psychology of Reasoning. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 7 (1):1-16.
Similar books and articles
Jonathan St B. T. Evans (2012). Questions and Challenges for the New Psychology of Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 18 (1):5 - 31.
Daniel B. Berch & Elizabeth J. Foley (1998). Processing Demands Associated with Relational Complexity: Testing Predictions with Dual-Task Methodologies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):832-833.
Linden J. Ball & Jeremy D. Quayle (2000). Alternative Task Construals, Computational Escape Hatches, and Dual-System Theories of Reasoning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):667-668.
John D. Bonvillian & Francine G. P. Patterson (2002). A New Paradigm? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (5):621-622.
Gary D. Shank (1980). A Reconstruction Paradigm for the Experimental Analysis of Semiotic Factors in Cognitive Processing. Semiotics:493-502.
Jonathan St B. T. Evans & Shira Elqayam (2007). Dual-Processing Explains Base-Rate Neglect, but Which Dual-Process Theory and How? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (3):261-262.
Shira Elqayam (2011). Models of Dependence and Independence: A Two-Dimensional Architecture of Dual Processing. Thinking and Reasoning 15 (4):377-387.
Guy Kahane (2012). On the Wrong Track: Process and Content in Moral Psychology. Mind and Language 27 (5):519-545.
Stuart G. Shanker & Barbara J. King (2002). The Emergence of a New Paradigm in Ape Language Research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (5):605-620.
Ewa Orlowska & Joanna Golinska-Pilarek (2011). Dual Tableaux: Foundations, Methodology, Case Studies. Springer.
Terence Rajivan Edward (2012). Feminist Research and Paradigm Shift in Anthropology. Meta 4 (2):343-362.
Francisco Calvo Garzón (2005). Rules, Similarity, and the Information-Processing Blind Alley. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):17-18.
Mike Oaksford & Nick Chater (2012). Dual Processes, Probabilities, and Cognitive Architecture. Mind and Society 11 (1):15-26.
Ansgar Beckermann (1994). Can There Be a Language of Thought? In G. White, B. Smith & R. Casati (eds.), Philosophy and the Cognitive Sciences. Proceedings of the 16th International Wittgenstein Symposium. Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky
Keith E. Stanovich (2004). Balance in Psychological Research: The Dual Process Perspective. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):357-358.
Added to index2012-03-05
Total downloads8 ( #367,542 of 1,789,830 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #420,676 of 1,789,830 )
How can I increase my downloads?