Please wait a minute...
Advances in Psychological Science    2018, Vol. 26 Issue (10) : 1794-1806     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01794
|
The cooperation and transformation mechanism of dual processing in reasoning and judgment
AI Yan,HU Zhujing()
School of Psychology, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang 330022, China
Download: PDF(580 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks     Supporting Info
Guide   
Abstract  

Theories about dual processing in reasoning and judgment have gone through different stages of development, and the focus on the definition and characteristics of the two processing processes in the early stage has turned to the study of the cooperation and transformation mechanism between the two at present. This study sorts out the representative models of the collaboration and transformation mechanism and its related experimental support evidence in the dual processing process, and summarizes the following three models: serial processing model, parallel competitive model and hybrid model. This study proceeds to compare and discuss the problems faced by the three models respectively as well as the differences and similarities between the three models in their interpretations of the transformation and cooperation mechanism between the two processing processes, the processing mechanism of conflict detection, and bias response.

Keywords dual processing      serial processing model      parallel competitive model      hybrid model     
Corresponding Authors: Zhujing HU     E-mail: huzjing@jxnu.edu.cn
Issue Date: 27 August 2018
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
AI Yan
HU Zhujing
Cite this article:   
AI Yan,HU Zhujing. The cooperation and transformation mechanism of dual processing in reasoning and judgment[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(10): 1794-1806.
URL:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2018.01794     OR     http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/Y2018/V26/I10/1794
双重加工理论提出者 T1 T2
Posner & Snyder (1975) 自动激活系统(automatic activation system) 意识加工系统(conscious processing system)
Shiffrin & Schneider (1977) 自动加工过程(automatic processing) 控制加工过程(controlled processing)
Johnson-Laird (1983) 内隐推理(implicit inferences) 外显推理(explicit inferences)
Evans (1984, 1989) 启发式过程(heuristic processing) 分析式过程(analytic processing)
Pollock (1991) 快速和灵活模块(quick and inflexible modules) 智力(intellection)
Reber (1993) 内隐认知 (implicit cognition) 外显学习(explicit learning)
Epstein (1973, 1994) 经验系统(experiential system) 理性系统(rational system)
Levinson (1995) 交互智力(interactional intelligence) 分析智力(analytic intelligence)
Sloman (1996) 联想系统(associative system) 规则系统(rule-based system)
Evans & Over (1996) 内隐思维过程(tacit thought processes) 外显思维过程(explicit thought processes)
Hammond (1996) 直觉认知(intuitive cognition) 分析认知(analytical cognition)
Klein (1998) 预先认知决策(recognition-primed decisions) 理性选择策略(rational choice strategy)
Stanovich & West (2000) 系统1 (System 1) 系统2 (System 2)
De Neys (2006) 自动启发式加工(Automatic-heuristic processing) 执行分析式加工(executive-analytic processing)
Evans (2011) 直觉加工(Intuitive processing) 反思性加工(Reflective processing)
特征 联想的(associative) 以规则为基础的(rule-based)
整体性(holistic) 分析性(analytic)
自动的(automatic) 控制性的(controlled)
不需要认知能力(relatively undemanding of cognitive capacity) 需要认知能力(demanding of cognitive capacity)
快速的(relatively fast) 缓慢的(relatively slow)
通过生理、暴露和个体经验获得(acquisition
by biology, exposure, and personal experience)
通过文化和形式指导获得(acquisition by cultural and formal tuition)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
1 胡竹菁, 胡笑羽 . ( 2012). Evans双重加工理论的发展过程简要述评. 心理学探新, 32( 4), 310-316.
url: http://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/xlxtx201204004
2 姚志强, 李亚非 . ( 2016). 逻辑-信念冲突与推理难度对逻辑和信念判断的影响. 心理科学, 39( 1), 36-42.
3 Banks A. P., & Hope, C. ( 2014). Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning: An event-related potential study of belief bias. Psychophysiology, 51( 3), 290-297.
pmid: 25003167 url: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/psyp.2014.51.issue-3
4 Barbey A. K., & Sloman, S. A . ( 2007). Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 30( 3), 241-254.
5 Barr N., Pennycook G., Stolz J. A., & Fugelsang J. A . ( 2015). Reasoned connections: A dual-process perspective on creative thought. Thinking & Reasoning, 21( 1), 61-75.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546783.2014.895915
6 Barrouillet P., ( 2011). Dual-process theories and cognitive development: Advances and challenges. Developmental Review, 31( 2-3), 79-85.
url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S027322971100013X
7 Beevers, C. G . ( 2005). Cognitive vulnerability to depression: A dual process model. Clinical Psychology Review, 25( 7), 975-1002.
url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0272735805000267
8 Bhatia S., ( 2017). Conflict and bias in heuristic judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43( 2), 319-325.
pmid: 27685023 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/xlm0000307
9 Chaiken S. , & Trope, Y.( 1999) . Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
10 De Neys W. , ( 2006). Automatic-heuristic and executive- analytic processing during reasoning: Chronometric and dual-task considerations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59( 6), 1070-1100.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/02724980543000123
11 De Neys W. , ( 2012). Bias and conflict: A case for logical intuitions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7( 1), 28-38.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691611429354
12 De Neys W. , ( 2014). Conflict detection, dual processes, and logical intuitions: Some clarifications. Thinking & Reasoning, 20( 2), 169-187.
13 De Neys W., Cromheeke S., & Osman M . ( 2011). Biased but in doubt: Conflict and decision confidence. PLoS One, 6( 1), e15954.
pmid: 21283574 url: http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015954
14 De Neys W., , & Glumicic, T. ( 2008). Conflict monitoring in dual process theories of thinking. Cognition, 106( 3), 1248-1299.
pmid: 17631876 url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010027707001576
15 De Neys W., Rossi S., & Houdé O . ( 2013). Bats, balls, and substitution sensitivity: Cognitive misers are no happy fools. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20( 2), 269-273.
pmid: 23417270 url: http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13423-013-0384-5
16 De Neys W., Vartanian O., & Goel V . ( 2008). Smarter than we think: When our brains detect that we are biased. Psychological Science, 19( 5), 483-489.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02113.x
17 Epstein S., ( 1973). The self-concept revisited or a theory of a theory . American Psychologist 28( 5), 404-416.
pmid: 4703058 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/h0034679
18 Epstein S., ( 1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49( 8), 709-724.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0003-066X.49.8.709
19 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 1984). Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning. British Journal of Psychology, 75( 4), 451-468.
url: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/bjop.1984.75.issue-4
20 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum.
21 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2003). In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7( 10), 454-459.
pmid: 14550493 url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661303002250
22 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2006). The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13( 3), 378-395.
pmid: 17048720 url: http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03193858
23 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2007). On the resolution of conflict in dual process theories of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 13( 4), 321-339.
url: http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-15216-001
24 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255-278.
pmid: 18154502 url: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629
25 Evans, J. St B. T.. ( 2009) . How many dual-process theories do we need? One, two, or many? In J. St. B. T. Evans & K. Frankish (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 33-54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
url: http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2009-05881-002
26 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2010). Intuition and reasoning: A dual- process perspective. Psychological Inquiry, 21( 4), 313-326.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1047840X.2010.521057
27 Evans, J. St. B. T . ( 2011). Dual-process theories of reasoning: Contemporary issues and developmental applications. Developmental Review, 31( 2-3), 86-102.
url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0273229711000189
28 Evans J. St. B. T., & Curtis-Holmes, J. ( 2005). Rapid responding increases belief bias: Evidence for the dual- process theory of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 11( 4), 382-389.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546780542000005
29 Evans, J. St. B. T ., & Over, D. E.( 1996). Rationality and reasoning. Hove, England: Psychology Press.
30 Evans J. St. B. T., Venn S., & Feeney A . ( 2002). Implicit and explicit processes in a hypothesis testing task. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 31-46.
pmid: 11839100 url: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1348/000712602162436
31 Evans J. St. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E . ( 2013 a). Dual-process theories of higher cognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8( 3), 223-241.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691612460685
32 Evans J. St. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E . ( 2013 b). Theory and metatheory in the study of dual processing: Reply to comments. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8( 3), 263-271.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691613483774
33 Franssens S., & De Neys, W. (2009). The effortless nature of conflict detection during thinking. Thinking & Reasoning, 15( 2), 105-128.
url: http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-06979-001
34 Frey D., Johnson E. D., & De Neys W . ( 2018). Individual differences in conflict detection during reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71( 5), 1188-1208.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17470218.2017.1313283
35 Gigerenzer G., & Regier, T. ( 1996). How do we tell an association from a rule? Comment on Sloman (1996). Psychological Bulletin, 119( 1), 23-26.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.23
36 Goel V., ( 2007). Anatomy of deductive reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11( 10), 435-441.
url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364661307002161
37 Goel V., & Dolan, R. J . ( 2003). Explaining modulation of reasoning by belief. Cognition, 87( 1), B11-B22.
pmid: 12499108 url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010027702001853
38 Gubbins E., & Byrne, R. M. J . ( 2014). Dual processes of emotion and reason in judgments about moral dilemmas. Thinking & Reasoning, 20( 2), 245-268.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546783.2013.877400
39 Hammond K. R. (1996). Human judgment and social policy. Oxford University Press..
40 Handley S. J., Newstead S. E., & Trippas D . ( 2011). Logic, beliefs, and instruction: A test of the default interventionist account of belief bias. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37( 1), 28-43.
pmid: 21058879 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0021098
41 Handley S. J., & Trippas, D. ( 2015). Dual processes and the interplay between knowledge and structure: A new parallel processing model. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 62, 33-58.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0079742114000036
42 Johnson E. D., Tubau E., & De Neys W . (2016). The doubting system 1: Evidence for automatic substitution sensitivity. Acta Psychogica, 164, 56-64.
pmid: 26722837 url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0001691815301025
43 Johnson-Laird, P. N.( 1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. Harvard University Press.
44 Kahneman D., ( 2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
45 Kahneman D. , & Frederick, S.( 2005) . A model of heuristic judgment. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 267-293). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
url: http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2005-09680-012
46 Keren G., ( 2013). A tale of two systems: A scientific advance or a theoretical stone soup? Commentary on evans stanovich. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8( 3), 257-262.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691613483474
47 Keren G., & Schul, Y. ( 2009). Two is not always better than one: A critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4( 6), 533-550.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01164.x
48 Klein G., ( 1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions. MIT Press.
url: http://www.mendeley.com/research/sources-power-people-make-decisions-3/
49 Klein G., ( 2015). A naturalistic decision making perspective on studying intuitive decision making. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4( 3), 164-168.
url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2211368115000364
50 Kokis J. V., Macpherson R., Toplak M. E., West R. F., & Stanovich K. E . ( 2002). Heuristic and analytic processing: Age trends and associations with cognitive ability and cognitive styles. Joural of Experimental Child Psychology, 83( 1), 26-52.
url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022096502001212
51 Kruglanski, A. W . ( 2013). Only one? The default interventionist perspective as a unimodel—Commentary on Evans & Stanovich (2013). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8( 3), 242-247.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691613483477
52 Kruglanski A. W., & Gigerenzer, G. ( 2011). Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. Psychological Review, 118( 1), 97-109.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0020762
53 Levinson S. C. ( 1995). Interactional biases in human thinking. In E. Goody (Ed. ), Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 221-260). Cambridge University Press.
url: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/246497169_Interactional_biases_in_human_thinking
54 Liang P. P., Goel V., Jia X. Q., & Li K. C . ( 2014). Different neural systems contribute to semantic bias and conflict detection in the inclusion fallacy task. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 797.
55 Lieberman, M. D . ( 2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: A review of core processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 259-289.
url: http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085654
56 Markovits H., Brisson J ., & de Chantal, P. L.( 2015). Additional evidence for a dual-strategy model of reasoning: Probabilistic reasoning is more invariant than reasoning about logical validity. Memory & Cognition, 43( 8), 1208-1215.
57 Markovits H., Brisson J., de Chantal P. L., & Thompson V. A . ( 2017). Interactions between inferential strategies and belief bias. Memory & Cognition, 45( 7), 1182-1192.
pmid: 28608194 url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28608194
58 Markovits H., Brunet M.-L., Thompson V., & Brisson J . ( 2013). Direct evidence for a dual process model of deductive inference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39( 4), 1213-1222.
pmid: 23206167 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0030906
59 Markovits H., Forgues H. L., & Brunet M. L . ( 2012). More evidence for a dual-process model of conditional reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 40( 5), 736-747.
pmid: 22287219 url: http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13421-012-0186-4
60 Osman M., ( 2004). An evaluation of dual-process theories of reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11( 6), 988-1010.
pmid: 15875969 url: http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/15875969
61 Osman M., ( 2013). A case study: Dual-process theories of higher cognition—Commentary on Evans & Stanovich (2013). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8( 3), 248-252.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691613483475
62 Pennycook G., ( 2017). A perspective on the theoretical foundation of dual-process models. In W. De Neys (Ed.), Dual process theory 2.0 . New York, NY: Psychology Press.
url: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/315544161_A_perspective_on_the_theoretical_foundation_of_dual-process_models
63 Pennycook G., Cheyne J. A., Barr N., Koehler D. J., & Fugelsang J. A . ( 2014). Cognitive style and religiosity: The role of conflict detection. Memory and Cognition, 42( 1), 1-10.
pmid: 23784742 url: http://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13421-013-0340-7
64 Pennycook G., Cheyne J. A., Seli P., Koehler D. J., & Fugelsang J. A . ( 2012). Analytic cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief. Cognition, 123( 3), 335-346.
pmid: 22481051 url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010027712000534
65 Pennycook G., Fugelsang J. A., & Koehler D. J . ( 2012). Are we good at detecting conflict during reasoning? Cognition, 124( 1), 101-106.
pmid: 22575046 url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010027712000765
66 Pennycook G., Fugelsang J. A., & Koehler D. J . ( 2015). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34-72.
pmid: 26091582 url: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010028515000481
67 Pennycook G., & Thompson, V. A . ( 2012). Reasoning with base rates is routine, relatively effortless, and context dependent. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19( 3), 528-534.
pmid: 22427266 url: http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13423-012-0249-3
68 Pennycook G., Trippas D., Handley S. J., & Thompson V. A . ( 2014). Base rates: Both neglected and intuitive. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40( 2), 544-554.
pmid: 24219086 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0034887
69 Pollock J. L. ( 1991). OSCAR: A general theory of rationality. In R. Cummins & J. L. Pollock (Eds.), Philosophy and AI: Essays at the interface (pp. 189-213). Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09528138908953702
70 Posner, M. I. & Snyder, C. R. R . ( 1975). Attention and cognitive control. In Robert L. Solso (Ed.),Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium. Lawrence Erlbaum.
71 Prado J., Kaliuzhna M., Cheylus A., & Noveck I. A . ( 2008). Overcoming perceptual features in logical reasoning: An event-related potentials study. Neuropsychologia, 46( 11), 2629-2637.
pmid: 18541277 url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0028393208001644
72 Pyszczynski T., Greenberg J., & Solomon S . ( 1999). A dual-process model of defense against conscious and unconscious death-related thoughts: An extension of terror management theory. Psychological Review, 106( 4), 835-845.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.835
73 Scherer L. D., Yates J. F., Baker S. G., & Valentine K. D . ( 2017). The influence of effortful thought and cognitive proficiencies on the conjunction fallacy: Implications for dual-process theories of reasoning and judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43( 6), 874-887.
url: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167217700607
74 Shiffrin, R. M. & Schneider W. , (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review 84( 2), 127-90.
75 Sloman, S. A . ( 1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119( 1), 3-22.
url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3
76 Sloman, S. A . ( 2014). Two systems of reasoning: An update. In J. W. Sherman, B. Gawronski, & Y. Trope (Eds.),Dual-process theories of the social mind (pp. 69-79). New York: Guilford Press
url: http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-08812-005
77 Stanovich K. E., & West, R. F . ( 2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23( 5), 645-665.
url: http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0140525X00003435
78 Stollstorff M., Vartanian O., & Goel V . ( 2012). Levels of conflict in reasoning modulate right lateral prefrontal cortex. Brain Research, 1428, 24-32.
pmid: 21684531 url: http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/21684531
79 Stupple E. J. N., & Ball, L. J . ( 2008). Belief-logic conflict resolution in syllogistic reasoning: Inspection-time evidence for a parallel-process model. Thinking & Reasoning, 14( 2), 168-181.
80 Toplak M. E., West R. F., & Stanovich K. E . ( 2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test. Thinking & Reasoning, 20( 2), 147-168.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ref/10.1080/13546783.2013.844729
81 Trippas D., Handley S. J., Verde M. F., & Morsanyi K . ( 2016). Logic brightens my day: Evidence for implicit sensitivity to logical validity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42( 9), 1448-1457.
pmid: 26889685 url: http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/xlm0000248
82 Trippas D., Thompson V. A., & Handley S. J . ( 2017). When fast logic meets slow belief: Evidence for a parallel- processing model of belief bias. Memory & Cognition, 45( 4), 539-552.
pmid: 28028779 url: http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-62304-001
83 Thompson V. A., & Johnson, S. C . ( 2014). Conflict, metacognition, and analytic thinking. Thinking & Reasoning, 20( 2), 215-244.
url: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13546783.2013.869763
84 Thompson V. A., & Morsany, K. ( 2012). Analytic thinking: Do you feel like it? Mind & Society, 11( 1), 93-105.
url: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11299-012-0100-6
85 Thompson V. A., Turner J. A. P., Pennycook G., Ball L. J., Brack H., Ophir Y., & Ackerman R . ( 2013). The role of answer fluency and perceptual fluency as metacognitive cues for initiating analytic thinking. Cognition, 128( 2), 237-251.
url: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010027712002120
[1] LIN Wenyi, ZHANG Jing, LI Guanzheng.  Text-belief consistent effect and the way of avoidance[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2018, 26(5): 789-795.
[2] SHEN Wang-Bing;LIU Chang. Critical Review on Psychological Studies on Moral Hypocrisy[J]. , 2012, 20(5): 745-756.
[3] HU Jin-Sheng;YE Chun;LI Xu;GAO Ting-Ting. “Irrationality” in Justice Judgment: Processing Mechanisms, Main Forms and Influencing Factors[J]. , 2012, 20(5): 726-734.
[4] Feng Chengzhi;Jia Fengqin. Review on Binocular Rivalry[J]. , 2008, 16(02): 213-221.
[5] Wang Ruiming, Mo Lei, Yan Xiumei. Technique Models and New Views of Studies of Text Reading[J]. , 2006, 14(03): 346-353.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
Copyright © Advances in Psychological Science
Support by Beijing Magtech