File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Testing Models of Cognition and Action Using Response Conflict and Multinomial Processing Tree Models

TitleTesting Models of Cognition and Action Using Response Conflict and Multinomial Processing Tree Models
Authors
Keywordsaction
cognition
culture and cognition
methods
multinomial processing tree models
response conflict tasks
Issue Date2023
Citation
Sociological Science, 2023, v. 10, p. 118-149 How to Cite?
AbstractDual-process perspectives have made substantial contributions to our understanding of behavior, but fundamental questions about how and when deliberate and automatic cognition shape action continue to be debated. Among these are whether automatic or deliberate cognition is ultimately in control of behavior, how often each type of cognition controls behavior in practice, and how the answers to each of these questions depends on the individual in question. To answer these questions, sociologists need methodological tools that enable them to directly test competing claims. We argue that this aim will be advanced by (a) using a particular type of data known as response conflict data and (b) analyzing those data using multinomial processing tree models. We illustrate the utility of this approach by reanalyzing three samples of data from Miles et al. (2019) on behaviors related to politics, morality, and race
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/330296
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMiles, Andrew-
dc.contributor.authorBrett, Gordon-
dc.contributor.authorKhan, Salwa-
dc.contributor.authorSamim, Yagana-
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-05T12:09:20Z-
dc.date.available2023-09-05T12:09:20Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.citationSociological Science, 2023, v. 10, p. 118-149-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/330296-
dc.description.abstractDual-process perspectives have made substantial contributions to our understanding of behavior, but fundamental questions about how and when deliberate and automatic cognition shape action continue to be debated. Among these are whether automatic or deliberate cognition is ultimately in control of behavior, how often each type of cognition controls behavior in practice, and how the answers to each of these questions depends on the individual in question. To answer these questions, sociologists need methodological tools that enable them to directly test competing claims. We argue that this aim will be advanced by (a) using a particular type of data known as response conflict data and (b) analyzing those data using multinomial processing tree models. We illustrate the utility of this approach by reanalyzing three samples of data from Miles et al. (2019) on behaviors related to politics, morality, and race-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofSociological Science-
dc.subjectaction-
dc.subjectcognition-
dc.subjectculture and cognition-
dc.subjectmethods-
dc.subjectmultinomial processing tree models-
dc.subjectresponse conflict tasks-
dc.titleTesting Models of Cognition and Action Using Response Conflict and Multinomial Processing Tree Models-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.15195/V10.A4-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85150473252-
dc.identifier.volume10-
dc.identifier.spage118-
dc.identifier.epage149-
dc.identifier.eissn2330-6696-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000948559100001-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats