新范式与大规模情态化:评Knauff和Gazzo Castañeda (2023)

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
D. Over
{"title":"新范式与大规模情态化:评Knauff和Gazzo Castañeda (2023)","authors":"D. Over","doi":"10.1080/13546783.2021.2017346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda argue as much in support of revised mental model theory (RMMT) as they argue against talk of a new paradigm caused by the probabilistic approach in the psychology of reasoning. They claim that RMMT is not essentially different from classical mental model theory (CMMT) and not essentially different from the probabilistic approach. There are many serious questions to ask about RMMT. But RMMT is a massive modalization of aspects of the extensional CMMT, and it follows the probabilistic approach in having an intensional focus that justifies talk of a new paradigm.","PeriodicalId":47270,"journal":{"name":"Thinking & Reasoning","volume":"72 1","pages":"389 - 395"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The new paradigm and massive modalization: Commentary on Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda (2023)\",\"authors\":\"D. Over\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13546783.2021.2017346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda argue as much in support of revised mental model theory (RMMT) as they argue against talk of a new paradigm caused by the probabilistic approach in the psychology of reasoning. They claim that RMMT is not essentially different from classical mental model theory (CMMT) and not essentially different from the probabilistic approach. There are many serious questions to ask about RMMT. But RMMT is a massive modalization of aspects of the extensional CMMT, and it follows the probabilistic approach in having an intensional focus that justifies talk of a new paradigm.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47270,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thinking & Reasoning\",\"volume\":\"72 1\",\"pages\":\"389 - 395\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thinking & Reasoning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2021.2017346\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thinking & Reasoning","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2021.2017346","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

Knauff和Gazzo Castañeda既支持修正心理模型理论(RMMT),也反对推理心理学中由概率方法引起的新范式的讨论。他们声称RMMT与经典心智模型理论(CMMT)没有本质上的区别,与概率方法也没有本质上的区别。关于RMMT有许多严肃的问题要问。但是RMMT是外延CMMT各方面的大规模模态化,它遵循概率方法,具有内延焦点,证明谈论新范式是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The new paradigm and massive modalization: Commentary on Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda (2023)
Abstract Knauff and Gazzo Castañeda argue as much in support of revised mental model theory (RMMT) as they argue against talk of a new paradigm caused by the probabilistic approach in the psychology of reasoning. They claim that RMMT is not essentially different from classical mental model theory (CMMT) and not essentially different from the probabilistic approach. There are many serious questions to ask about RMMT. But RMMT is a massive modalization of aspects of the extensional CMMT, and it follows the probabilistic approach in having an intensional focus that justifies talk of a new paradigm.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Thinking & Reasoning
Thinking & Reasoning PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
11.50%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信