Limits on perception of cognitive processes: A reply to Nisbett and Wilson

Psychological Review 85 (4):355-362 (1978)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Criticizes R. E. Nisbett and T. D. Wilson's counterintuitive argument on theoretical and methodological grounds. It is suggested that inappropriate statistical tests were used and that their argument was stated in a nonfalsifiable position. In addition, it is also argued that causality was incorrectly defined, other essential definitions were missing, and that other evidence opposes their theory

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Is Cognition Enough to Explain Cognitive Development?Linda B. Smith & Adam Sheya - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (4):725-735.
Attention and alerting: Cognitive processes spared in blindsight.Robert W. Kentridge & Charles A. Heywood - 2001 - In Beatrice De Gelder, Edward H. F. De Haan & Charles A. Heywood (eds.), Out of Mind: Varieties of Unconscious Processes. Oxford University Press. pp. 163-181.
Conscious thought as simulation of behavior and perception.Germund Hesslow - 2002 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 6 (6):242-247.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-05-26

Downloads
7 (#1,201,127)

6 months
1 (#1,040,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?