10 found
Alex O. Holcombe [6]Alex Holcombe [4]
  1. Temporal phenomenology: phenomenological illusion versus cognitive error.Kristie Miller, Alex Holcombe & Andrew J. Latham - 2020 - Synthese 197 (2):751-771.
    Temporal non-dynamists hold that there is no temporal passage, but concede that many of us judge that it seems as though time passes. Phenomenal Illusionists suppose that things do seem this way, even though things are not this way. They attempt to explain how it is that we are subject to a pervasive phenomenal illusion. More recently, Cognitive Error Theorists have argued that our experiences do not seem that way; rather, we are subject to an error that leads us mistakenly (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  2. The Rationality of Near Bias toward both Future and Past Events.Preston Greene, Alex Holcombe, Andrew J. Latham, Kristie Miller & James Norton - 2021 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 12 (4):905-922.
    In recent years, a disagreement has erupted between two camps of philosophers about the rationality of bias toward the near and bias toward the future. According to the traditional hybrid view, near bias is rationally impermissible, while future bias is either rationally permissible or obligatory. Time neutralists, meanwhile, argue that the hybrid view is untenable. They claim that those who reject near bias should reject both biases and embrace time neutrality. To date, experimental work has focused on future-directed near bias. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3. What do VR experiments teach us about time?Andrew J. Latham & Alex Holcombe - 2023 - Frontiers in Psychology 13:1082844.
    Gruber and Smith (2019) have conducted some interesting virtual reality (VR) experiments, but we think that these experiments fail to illuminate why people think that the present is special. Their experiments attempted to test a suggestion by Hartle (2005) that with VR one might construct scenarios in which people experience the same present twice. If that’s possible, then it could give us a reason to think that when we experience the present as being special, that’s not because it’s objectively so. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
  4. On believing that time does not flow, but thinking that it seems to.Kristie Miller, Alex Holcombe & Andrew J. Latham - 2019 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 42.
    Hoerl & McCormack posit two systems – the temporal updating system and the temporal reasoning system – and suggest that they explain an inherent contradiction in people's naïve theory of time. We suggest there is no contradiction. Something does, however, require explanation: the tension between certain sophisticated beliefs about time, and certain phenomenological states or beliefs about those phenomenological states. The temporal updating mechanism posited by H&M may contribute to this tension.
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  6
    The Effect of Visual Distinctiveness on Multiple Object Tracking Performance.Piers D. L. Howe & Alex O. Holcombe - 2012 - Frontiers in Psychology 3.
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  6.  16
    Exhausting attentional tracking resources with a single fast-moving object.Alex O. Holcombe & Wei-Ying Chen - 2012 - Cognition 123 (2):218-228.
    Direct download (5 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  7.  35
    Failures to bind spatially coincident features: comment on Di Lollo.Alex O. Holcombe & Colin Wg Clifford - 2012 - Trends in Cognitive Sciences 16 (8):402.
  8.  32
    Christopher Mole, Declan Smithies, and Wayne Wu, eds. , Attention: Philosophical and Psychological Essays . Reviewed by.Alex O. Holcombe & Goodbourn - 2013 - Philosophy in Review 33 (5):391-395.
  9.  18
    Bayesian belief updating after a replication experiment.Alex O. Holcombe & Samuel J. Gershman - 2018 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 41.
  10.  4
    A billion-dollar donation: estimating the cost of researchers’ time spent on peer review.Alex O. Holcombe, Barnabas Szaszi & Balazs Aczel - 2021 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 6 (1).
    BackgroundThe amount and value of researchers’ peer review work is critical for academia and journal publishing. However, this labor is under-recognized, its magnitude is unknown, and alternative ways of organizing peer review labor are rarely considered.MethodsUsing publicly available data, we provide an estimate of researchers’ time and the salary-based contribution to the journal peer review system.ResultsWe found that the total time reviewers globally worked on peer reviews was over 100 million hours in 2020, equivalent to over 15 thousand years. The (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
    Export citation