Explanatory coherence in social explanations: A parallel distributed processing account.

Read, Stephen J.; Marcus‐Newhall, Amy

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.3.429

Cited by 257 publications

(246 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

233

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently several theorists have advanced parallel-constraintsatisfaction models in various domains in social psychology (Kunda & Thagard, 1996;Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993;Shultz & Lepper, 1996). Like the current simulation, these models are able to apply simultaneously multiple stored knowledge structures to generate inferences rather than selecting a single schema to guide processing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Knowledge acquisition, accessibility, and use in person perception and stereotyping: Simulation with a recurrent connectionist network.

Smith¹,

DeCoster²

1998

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

122

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Connectionist models contrast in many ways with the symbolic models that have traditionally been applied within social psychology. In this article the authors apply an autoassociative connectionist model originally developed by J. L. to reproduce several well-replicated and theoretically important phenomena related to person perception and stereotyping. These phenomena are exemplar-based inference, group-based stereotyping, the simultaneous application of several stereotypes to generate emergent characteristics, and the effects of recency and frequency of prior exposures on accessibility (the probability of a representation's use). Though many of these phenomena are explained by current theories in social psychology, the simulation contributes to parsimony and theoretical integration by showing that a single, very simple mechanism can generate them all. The model also predicts a new phenomenon--rapid recovery of accessibility after it has declined to zero.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Models using local representations (one unit per concept or proposition) can reproduce some social psychological phenomena (Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993). However, we see several advantages of distributed over local representations.…”

Section: Distributed Representationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge acquisition, accessibility, and use in person perception and stereotyping: Simulation with a recurrent connectionist network.

Smith¹,

DeCoster²

1998

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

122

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In these conceptual structures, some features are central in that they have greater explanatory power than other more peripheral features (Kunda & Thagard, 1996;Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993;Thagard, 1989). For example, in human-made products (e.g., furniture) functional features are more central than nonfunctional features (e.g., color), whereas in natural categories (e.g., tiger) genetic features are more central than morphological features (Rothbart & Taylor, 1992).…”

Section: Temporal Construalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory.

Liberman¹,

Trope²

1998

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

1,893

1,797

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Temporal construal theory states that distant future situations are construed on a higher level (i.e., using more abstract and central features) than near future situations. Accordingly, the theory suggests that the value associated with the high-level construal is enhanced over delay and that the value associated with the low-level construal is discounted over delay. In goal-directed activities, desirability of the activity's end state represents a high-level construal, whereas the feasibility of attaining this end state represents a low-level construal. Study 1 found that distant future activities were construed on a higher level than near future activities. Studies 2 and 3 showed that decisions regarding distant future activities, compared with decisions regarding near future activities, were more influenced by the desirability of the end state and less influenced by the feasibility of attaining the end state. Study 4 presented students with a real-life choice of academic assignments varying in difficulty (feasibility) and interest (desirability). In choosing a distant future assignment, students placed relatively more weight on the assignment's interest, whereas in choosing a near future assignment, they placed relatively more weight on difficulty. Study 5 found that distant future plans, compared with near future plans, were related to desirability of activities rather than to time constraints.In everyday life, people judge and make decisions about events that will take place either in the relatively near future or in the distant future. For example, one may need to decide whether to take a vacation, give a lecture, or attend a conference a few months in advance or just a few days in advance. This article addresses the question of how temporal distance from an event affects people's decisions regarding that event. We argue that distant future events are construed on a higher level (i.e., by using more central and abstract features of the event) than near future events. Therefore, decisions regarding distant future events are likely to be based on relatively central and abstract features of events, whereas decisions regarding near future events are likely to be based on more incidental and concrete features of events. We report a series of five studies that tested this hypothesis in a variety of decision situations. Time-Dependent Changes in Value and ExpectanciesPast research on the psychological effects of temporal distance has been mainly concerned with time-dependent changes

show abstract

“…Read and Marcus-Newhall (1993) found that explanations of social behavior operate in accord with principles of explanatory coherence, and Simon (2004) reviews experimental studies of legal decision making that are naturally understood in terms of coherence. Ranney and Schank (1998) discuss the relevance of explanatory coherence for understanding and improving scientific reasoning by students.…”

Section: Explanatory Coherence: the Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Explanations in Law, Science, and Everyday Life

Thagard

2006

Curr Dir Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT-This article reviews a theory of explanatory coherence that provides a psychologically plausible account of how people evaluate competing explanations. The theory is implemented in a computational model that uses simple artificial neural networks to simulate many important cases of scientific and legal reasoning. Current research directions include extensions to emotional thinking and implementation in more biologically realistic neural networks.KEYWORDS-explanation; coherence; neural networks; legal reasoning; emotionIn CSI and other television crime shows, investigators collect evidence in order to determine the causes of a crime. For example, if a young woman is murdered, the police may consider as suspects the woman's boyfriend and her father. Inferences about who is the most likely culprit will be based on which hypothesis-that the boyfriend did it or that the father did it-fits best with all the available evidence. These hypotheses provide possible explanations of the evidence; for example the hypothesis that the boyfriend was the murderer may explain why his fingerprints are on the murder weapon. Conclusions about who the actual criminal was and who was innocent depend on evaluating competing explanations of the evidence.This kind of explanatory inference is ubiquitous in human thinking, ranging from mechanical repair to medical diagnosis to scientific theorizing. When your car fails to start, you consider alternative explanations such as that it is out of gas or that the battery is dead. In medicine, a physician considers possible diseases that would explain a patient's symptoms and bases a treatment plan on what he or she thinks is the most plausible diagnosis. Psychologists publishing theoretical papers often offer sets of hypotheses that they contend provide better explanations of the results of experiments than alternative theories do.Explanation evaluation is a mental process that is important in many areas of psychology. Cognitive psychologists have investigated causal reasoning, which often requires a person to determine the most likely cause of a surprising event. Social psychologists have studied how people explain the behavior of others. Clinical psychologists are sometimes interested in the emotion-laden reasoning by which people construct explanations of their own situations. In all these kinds of cases, people's thinking involves evaluating competing explanations of what they observe.But explanation evaluation is not simply a matter of determining which of two or more competing hypotheses fits best with the evidence. We may also need to consider how hypotheses fit with each other, particularly when one hypothesis provides an explanation of another. This layering of hypotheses is particularly evident in legal reasoning when questions of motive are salient. Crime investigators considering whether the boyfriend or the father is the more likely murderer will naturally consider possible motives that might explain why one of them would have wanted to kill the young woman. Hence the cognit...

show abstract

Explanatory coherence in social explanations: A parallel distributed processing account.

Cited by 257 publications

References 36 publications

Knowledge acquisition, accessibility, and use in person perception and stereotyping: Simulation with a recurrent connectionist network.

Knowledge acquisition, accessibility, and use in person perception and stereotyping: Simulation with a recurrent connectionist network.

The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory.

Evaluating Explanations in Law, Science, and Everyday Life

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About