Beyond two modes of thought: A quantum model of how three cognitive variables yield conceptual change
Frontiers in Psychology 13 (2022)
Abstract
We re-examine the long-held postulate that there are two modes of thought, and develop a more fine-grained analysis of how different modes of thought affect conceptual change. We suggest that cognitive development entails the fine-tuning of three dimensions of thought: abstractness, divergence, and context-specificity. Using a quantum cognition modeling approach, we show how these three variables differ, and explain why they would have a distinctively different impacts on thought processes and mental contents. We suggest that, through simultaneous manipulation of all three variables, one spontaneously, and on an ongoing basis, tailors one's mode of thought to the demands of the current situation. The paper concludes with an analysis based on results from an earlier study of children's mental models of the shape of the Earth. The example illustrates how, through reiterated transition between mental states using these three variables, thought processes unfold, and conceptual change ensues. While this example concerns children, the approach applies more broadly to adults as well as children.DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2022.905446
My notes
Similar books and articles
The Historian, His Documents, and the Elementary Modes of Historical Thought.R. Stephen Humphreys - 1980 - History and Theory 19 (1):1-20.
A Locally Deterministic, Detector-Based Model of Quantum Measurement.Brian R. La Cour - 2014 - Foundations of Physics 44 (10):1059-1084.
Quantum Computer: Quantum Model and Reality.Vasil Penchev - 2020 - Epistemology eJournal (Elsevier: SSRN) 13 (17):1-7.
Hidden Measurements, Hidden Variables and the Volume Representation of Transition Probabilities.Todd A. Oliynyk - 2005 - Foundations of Physics 35 (1):85-107.
The Potential of Using Quantum Theory to Build Models of Cognition.Zheng Wang, Jerome R. Busemeyer, Harald Atmanspacher & Emmanuel M. Pothos - 2013 - Topics in Cognitive Science 5 (4):672-688.
Does Physics Reinforce Idealism?Anguel Stefanov - 1992 - Nature, Society, and Thought 5 (2):175-182.
Model-theoretic investigations into consequence operation (cn) in quantum logics: An algebraic approach.Piotr Wilczek - unknown
An Autocatalytic Network Model of Conceptual Change.Liane Gabora, Nicole M. Beckage & Mike Steel - 2022 - Topics in Cognitive Science 14 (1):163-188.
Color-Coded Epistemic Modes in a Jungian Hexagon of Opposition.Julio Michael Stern - 2022 - In Jean-Yves Beziau & Ioannis Vandoulakis (eds.), The Exoteric Square of Opposition. Cham:
A Simple Model for an Objective Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.Claudio Garola - 2002 - Foundations of Physics 32 (10):1597-1615.
Solomon’s Argument on Hidden Variables in Quantum Theory.M. A. B. Whitaker - 2007 - Foundations of Physics 37 (6):989-997.
Cpu Or Self-reference: Discerning Between Cognitive Science and Quantum Functionalist Models of Mentation.Kim Mccarthy & Amit Goswami - 1993 - Journal of Mind and Behavior 14 (1):13-26.
The Bohmian Model of Quantum Cosmology.Craig Callender & Robert Weingard - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:218 - 227.
A Quantum Probability Account of Order Effects in Inference.Jennifer S. Trueblood & Jerome R. Busemeyer - 2011 - Cognitive Science 35 (8):1518-1552.
Analytics
Added to PP
2022-10-02
Downloads
4 (#1,239,723)
6 months
4 (#184,255)
2022-10-02
Downloads
4 (#1,239,723)
6 months
4 (#184,255)
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition Advancing the Debate.Jonathan Evans & Keith E. Stanovich - 2013 - Perspectives on Psychological Science 8 (3):223-241.
The empirical case for two systems of reasoning.Steven A. Sloman - 1996 - Psychological Bulletin 119 (1):3-22.
The associative basis of the creative process.Sarnoff Mednick - 1962 - Psychological Review 69 (3):220-232.
Quantum Structure in Cognition: Human Language as a Boson Gas of Entangled Words.Diederik Aerts & Lester Beltran - 2020 - Foundations of Science 25 (3):755-802.