Reasoning = representation + process: Common ground for Fuzzy Trace and Dual Process Theories.

Misconceptions, misinformation, and moving forward in theories of COVID-19 risky behaviors.

“…When someone reads a message, there is no direct effect of the message; instead, mental representations of the message are formed at the moment that provide the inputs to reasoning and decision making. Although Thompson et al (2021) assert that working-memory capacity must limit reasoning and point to excellent work indicating that memory accuracy is correlated with reasoning accuracy (e.g., Toplak et al, 2011), this conclusion is not correct. The test of whether working-memory capacity determines reasoning is not correlating performance on two different tasks.…”

“…Similarly, dual-process approaches might be reconciled with FTT per Thompson et al (2021) but with caveats: FTT's models of recognition, recall, reasoning, and decision-making spell out how gist and verbatim thinking unfold in parallel (typically unfolding to completion, except in speeded tasks) and both influences can be revealed by designing diagnostic tasks (e.g., confidence judgments per Thompson & Newman, 2018). We did away with the serial processing assumption of logicist and formalist approaches in favor of well-specified intuitionism (Reyna & Brainerd, 1995).…”

“…Although knowledge can be lacking (e.g., numeracy and scientific literacy), typically, even children have the underlying competence to engage in normative reasoning; they have expected value, logical reasoning, class-inclusion, and probabilistic competencies, which makes it all the more surprising that these are not retrieved and applied by adults when lives are at stake, as in COVID-19. By embarking on the research program outlined by Thompson et al (2021), as a field, we can ultimately understand these paradoxes and help the public make rational decisions about their health.…”

“…Many highlight how fuzzy-trace theory (FTT) accomplishes this goal by weaving together cognitive, social, emotional, and neuroscientific constructs to explain multiply determined decisions that involve risk (e.g., Edelson & Reyna, 2021), applying falsifiable models (e.g., Broniatowski & Reyna, 2018). Others encourage looking beyond cognition, and they raise questions about the efficacy of current behavioral theories, including FTT (Broomell & Chapman, 2021), and whether FTT should be combined with dual-process approaches to achieve greater explanatory and predictive power (Thompson et al, 2021).…”

“…That challenge of thinking in new ways is before us as nations struggle to defeat a viral disease whose spread depends on human behavior. Broomell and Chapman (2021), Fischhoff (2021), Jamieson (2021), Scheufele et al (2021), Thompson et al (2021), and Wolfe, (2021) each argue eloquently for the crucial role of human behavior in combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, and, by implication, for greater emphasis on theory.…”