Commentary: Seeing the conflict: an attentional account of reasoning errors

Frontiers in Psychology

Darren P. Frey¹ 

关键词: intuition;    reasoning;    decision making;    conflict detection;    attention;   

DOI  :  10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01284

学科分类：心理学（综合）

来源: Frontiers

【 摘 要 】

In a recent study, Mata et al. (2017) test a two-stage account of reasoning that differentiates between the initial interpretation and selection of information within a problem, and the subsequent operation on this information. Crucially, on this account, reasoning errors can result from mistakes at either stage. In previous work, the authors found indirect experimental evidence in support of this account (e.g., Mata et al., 2014), and their most recent experiments address it by analyzing reasoners' on-line attentional resources in situations of conflict. To do so, the authors record eye-tracking measurements as participants evaluate both classical reasoning tasks that induce conflict (variants of the bat-and-ball item from the Cognitive Reflection Test, Frederick, 2005), and comparably structured no-conflict items. Their two-stage account makes at least two strong predictions. All things being equal, correct responders should: (1) attend to conflict problems more than no-conflict items; (2) and they should attend to conflict items more than incorrect responders.

【 授权许可】

CC BY