Knowledge Attributions and Behavioral Predictions

Turri, John

doi:10.1111/cogs.12469

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 32 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Knowledge attributions consistently predicted behavioral predictions more strongly than belief attributions did. Moreover, a causal search algorithm suggested that knowledge attributions caused behavioral predictions in contexts where belief attributions did not (Turri, 2016a). Whereas previous research has demonstrated a unique role for knowledge attributions in evaluating how people should behave (e.g., Turri, 2015a, 2015b; Turri, Friedman, & Keefner, 2017), these findings suggest a previously unrecognized role for knowledge attributions in predicting how people will behave.…”

Section: Do Attributions Of Knowledge Depend On Belief?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge before belief

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the capacity to understand others’ minds has tended to focus on representations of beliefs, which are widely taken to be among the most central and basic theory of mind representations. Representations of knowledge, by contrast, have received comparatively little attention and have often been understood as depending on prior representations of belief. After all, how could one represent someone as knowing something if one doesn't even represent them as believing it? Drawing on a wide range of methods across cognitive science, we ask whether belief or knowledge is the more basic kind of representation. The evidence indicates that non-human primates attribute knowledge but not belief, that knowledge representations arise earlier in human development than belief representations, that the capacity to represent knowledge may remain intact in patient populations even when belief representation is disrupted, that knowledge (but not belief) attributions are likely automatic, and that explicit knowledge attributions are made more quickly than equivalent belief attributions. Critically, the theory of mind representations uncovered by these various methods exhibit a set of signature features clearly indicative of knowledge: they are not modality-specific, they are factive, they are not just true belief, and they allow for representations of egocentric ignorance. We argue that these signature features elucidate the primary function of knowledge representation: facilitating learning from others about the external world. This suggests a new way of understanding theory of mind—one that is focused on understanding others’ minds in relation to the actual world, rather than independent from it.

show abstract

Section: Do Attributions Of Knowledge Depend On Belief?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge before belief

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cada criterio conceptual, con respecto al método, no solo responde a tendencias y teorías según el contexto de convergencia de los autores, algunos con discrepancias visibles, otros con ejemplificaciones sobre resultados, lo importante, es el aporte de establecer criterios de evaluación científica sobre resultados obtenidos, por lo que, según la finalidad, el entorno circundante del fenómeno en sí mismo será el método a emplear por el investigador, donde explicar la conexión entre el conocimiento y la verdad es una necesidad (Turri, 2017;Blouw et al, 2017).…”

Section: Método Trascendentalunclassified

Verdad y validez del conocimiento. Premisas para la consultoría administrativa.

Pérez¹,

Rojas²,

Catunta³

2022

eyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El estudio tiene como objetivo sintetizar las argumentaciones acerca de verdad y conocimiento científico, desde teorías y apuntes de diferentes autores; para referir el proceso de validez del conocimiento como resultado de investigación. A través de tres motores de búsquedas (ScienceDirect, Scopus y SciELO), se realizó una exploración pormenorizada con la ecuación en español e inglés: “verdad”, “validez cognoscitiva”, “conocimiento científico” y “consultoría administrativa”. Se revisaron 29 artículos para el análisis conceptual de las palabras claves, mediante 28 revistas científicas, considerándose el contraste entre la relación de las mismas con la finalidad de construcción de premisas para la instrumentación e implementación de la consultoría administrativa. Pues, a partir del conocimiento empírico, se realiza un análisis para la construcción del conocimiento científico, definiendo las cualidades superiores entre ellos. Se constata la relación del conocimiento con la administración de consultoría empresarial, constituyendo premisas en la gestión del conocimiento, debido a que, los análisis referenciales estudiados constituyen aportes, que permiten al gestor en consultoría administrativa contribuir a la planeación y concepción estratégica, en la gestión integral de los procesos organizacionales. Se concluye con supuestas premisas de aceptar o rechazar, a partir de la necesidad de interacción de diferentes disciplinas para validar conocimiento como fuente originaria para la administración.

show abstract

“…Relatedly, Turri () argues that knowledge attributions play a different functional role in mindreading than belief (or, in Nagel's terms, nonfactive) attributions. Knowledge attributions lead to faster and more reliable behavioral predictions than belief attributions.…”

Section: Mindreading Broadly Construedmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is mindreading?

Spaulding

2019

WIRES Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theory of mind, also known as mindreading, refers to our ability to attribute mental states to agents in order to make sense of and interact with other agents. Recently, theorists in this literature have advanced a broad conception of mindreading. In particular, psychologists and philosophers have examined how we attribute knowledge, intention, mentalistically loaded stereotypes, and personality traits to others. Moreover, the diversity of our goals in a social interaction—precision, efficiency, self/in‐group protection—generates diversity in the mindreading processes we employ. Finally, the products of mindreading are varied, as well. We produce different sorts of mindreading explanations depending on our epistemic goals and the situational context. In this article, I piece together these different strands of research to present a broad conception of mindreading that is complex, messy, and interesting. This article is categorized under: Philosophy > Knowledge and Belief Philosophy > Psychological Capacities

show abstract

Knowledge Attributions and Behavioral Predictions

Cited by 10 publications

References 32 publications

Knowledge before belief

Knowledge before belief

Verdad y validez del conocimiento. Premisas para la consultoría administrativa.

What is mindreading?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About