Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans, Keith E. Stanovich
University of Plymouth University of Toronto
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
Dual-process and dual-system theories in both cognitive and social psychology have been subjected to a number of recently published criticisms. However, they have been attacked as a category, incorrectly assuming there is a generic version that applies to all. We identify and respond to 5 main lines of argument made by such critics. We agree that some of these arguments have force against some of the theories in the literature but believe them to be overstated. We argue that the dual-processing distinction is supported by much recent evidence in cognitive science. Our preferred theoretical approach is one in which rapid autonomous processes (Type 1) are assumed to yield default responses unless intervened on by distinctive higher order reasoning processes (Type 2). What defines the difference is that Type 2 processing supports hypothetical thinking and load heavily on working memory.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
生物医学Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Cognitive Science and Mapping · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
参考文献 139
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 4,144
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条