scholarly journals Argumentation, rationality, and psychology of reasoning

2015 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 135 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Godden
Keyword(s):  
Dual Process ◽  
Cognitive Capacities ◽  
Psychological States ◽  
Psychology Of Reasoning ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
System 2 ◽  
The Common ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
The Relationship

This paper explicates an account of argumentative rationality by articulating the common, basic idea of its nature, and then identifying a collection of assumptions inherent in it. Argumentative rationality is then contrasted with dual-process theories of reasoning and rationality prevalent in the psychology of reasoning. It is argued that argumentative rationality properly corresponds only with system-2 reasoning in dual-process theories. This result challenges the prescriptive force of argumentative norms derives if they derive at all from their descriptive accuracy of our cognitive capacities. In response, I propose an activity-based account of reasoning which retains the assumptions of argumentative rationality while recontextualizing the relationship between reasoning as a justificatory activity and the psychological states and processes underlying that activity.

scholarly journals When and for Whom Implicit Partner Evaluations Predict Forgiveness

2020 ◽  
pp. 194855062093647
Author(s):  
Ruddy Faure ◽  
Francesca Righetti ◽  
Grace Larson ◽  
Maria Fernanda Cuellar ◽  
Antonis Koutsoumpis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Executive Control ◽  
Experimental Manipulation ◽  
Relationship Maintenance ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
Relationship Success ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Control Study

Recent work suggests that implicit partner evaluations have long-term implications for relationship success. However, little evidence shows whether and under which conditions implicit partner evaluations affect relationship maintenance processes in daily life, especially those exhibited in situations that may be highly decisive for the fate of the relationship, such as when partners hurt each other. Drawing upon dual-process theories, we predicted that, when executive control is limited—either as a trait or a state—people’s implicit partner evaluations influence forgiveness toward their partner. Results revealed that when temporarily impairing people’s executive control with an experimental manipulation (Study 1), or for people with lower trait executive control (Study 2), more positive implicit partner evaluations were associated with more forgiveness, both in laboratory settings and in an 8-day diary. These findings highlight the importance of implicit partner evaluations under specific, yet common, conditions for promoting reparatory responses that are key to relationship success.

Freud's dual process theory and the place of the a-rational

2003 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 527-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda A. W. Brakel ◽  
Howard Shevrin
Keyword(s):  
Dual Process ◽  
Dual Process Theory ◽  
Process Theory ◽  
Rational System ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
System 2 ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
System 1 ◽  
Evolutionary Fitness

In this commentary on Stanovich & West (S&W) we call attention to two points: (1) Freud's original dual process theory, which antedates others by some seventy-five years, deserves inclusion in any consideration of dual process theories. His concepts of primary and secondary processes (Systems 1 and 2, respectively) anticipate significant aspects of current dual process theories and provide an explanation for many of their characteristics. (2) System 1 is neither rational nor irrational, but instead a-rational. Nevertheless, both the a-rational System 1 and the rational System 2 can each have different roles in enhancing evolutionary fitness. Lastly, System 1 operations are incorrectly deemed “rational” whenever they increase evolutionary fitness.

scholarly journals Pre-Clerkship Medical Students’ Experiences and Perspectives of System 1 and System 2 Thinking: A Qualitative Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 34
Author(s):  
William Sanders ◽  
Douglas McHugh
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Clinical Information ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
System 2 ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
System 1

Dual-process theories may be invoked to explain how physicians interact with, interpret, and draw inferences from clinical information. Stanovich and West’s model articulates two kinds of thinking—intuitive-based System 1 and analytical-based System 2—which have been under-investigated with physicians in training. This qualitative study explored pre-clerkship medical students’ retrospective perspectives and experiences of System 1 and System 2 thinking via 12 semi-structured interviews and abductive, progressive focusing. Participants identified patient interactions, clinical note writing, knowledge synthesis, problem list and differential diagnosis generation, evaluating evidence, and critical appraisal of literature as pre-clerkship opportunities to engage in System 1 or System 2 thinking. Six major themes emerged from analysis of participants’ interview transcripts: cognitive processes, deliberate practice, learning environment: being alone or being together, stickiness factor, biases and heuristics, and prior experience of attaining competence. Participants valued the anticipated role that System 1 and System 2 thinking will play in their future practice, and experienced nascent, self-regulated development of these cognitive processes during the pre-clerkship phase of their education without formal feedback or coaching from clinician preceptors. Pre-clerkship curricula should further embrace low-stakes, incremental teaching on metacognition and continuous monitoring of knowledge processing as a key competency for physician learners.

The role of language in the dual process theory of thinking

2002 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 684-685
Author(s):  
Jonathan St. B. T. Evans ◽  
David E. Over
Keyword(s):  
Dual Process ◽  
Critical Feature ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
Psychological Evidence ◽  
System 2 ◽  
Explicit Representations ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
Verbal Processes ◽  
System 1

Carruthers’proposals would seem to implicate language in what is known as System 2 thinking (explicit) rather than System 1 thinking (implicit) in contemporary dual process theories of thinking and reasoning. We provide outline description of these theories and show that while Carruthers’characterization of non-verbal processes as domain-specific identifies one critical feature of System 1 thinking, he appears to overlook the fact that much cognition of this type results from domain-general learning processes. We also review cognitive psychological evidence that shows that language and the explicit representations it supports are heavily involved in supporting System 1 thinking, but falls short of supporting his claim that it is the medium in which domain-general thinking occurs.

Influence of Experience on the Thought Process of Clinical Psychologists: An Analysis from the Dual-Process Theories Framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana M. Nieto ◽  
María R. Villarejo
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Reasoning ◽  
Clinical Psychologists ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
System 2 ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
System 1 ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
Different Levels

Abstract In the course of their work, psychologists must make judgments and complex decisions, skills that are part of clinical reasoning. Recent models approach the analysis of such process using the dual-process theories framework. This study provides an assessment of the two systems, System 1 and System 2, in forty-five clinical psychologists with different levels of experience (novices, intermediates and experts) with the purpose of exploring their level of activation and evolution throughout such stages of expertise. According to the results, clinical psychologists mainly activate System 2, M = 70.91, SD = 6.71, than System 1, M = 60.49, SD = 3.78; $ {F}_{\left(1,\kern0.5em 41\right)}=7.99;p<.01;{\upeta}^2=.163, $ when performing their clinical duties. However, no significant changes have been observed regarding the preferential use of thinking Systems 1 or 2 throughout the experience, both systems are used in a similar way in the different levels of expertise analyzed, with an increase of System 2 at the intermediate level of expertise. The results are analyzed in terms of intermediate effect and discussed focusing on the unremitting need for System 2 in psychologist work given the idiosyncratic characteristics of each case requiring treatment in the area of psychology and on the relationship of the two systems in clinical reasoning.

scholarly journals Of two minds or one? A registered replication of Rydell et al. (2006)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Heycke ◽  
Sarah Marie Gehrmann ◽  
Julia M. Haaf ◽  
Christoph Stahl
Keyword(s):  
Impression Formation ◽  
Evaluative Conditioning ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Target Person ◽  
Implicit Measures ◽  
Process Theories ◽  
Dual Process Theories ◽  
Reliability And Robustness ◽  
Selective Influence ◽  
Behavioral Information

Evaluative conditioning (EC) is proposed as a mechanism of automatic preference acquisition in dual-process theories of attitudes (Gawronski &amp; Bodenhausen, 2006; Rydell &amp; McConnell, 2006). Evidence for the automaticity of EC comes from studies claiming EC effects for subliminally presented stimuli. An impression-formation study by Rydell and colleagues (2006) showed a selective influence of briefly presented primes on implicitly measured attitudes, whereas supraliminally presented behavioral information about the target person was reflected in explicit ratings. This finding is considered one of the strongest pieces of evidence for dual process theories (Sweldens, Corneille, &amp; Yzerbyt, 2014), and it is therefore crucial to assess its reliability and robustness. The present study presents two registered replications of the Rydell et al. (2006) study. In contrast to the original findings, the implicit measures did not reflect the valence of the subliminal primes in both studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document