Pub Date : 2023-06-15DOI: 10.1177/09637214231178745
E. Pronin, Lori Hazel
Human beings have a bias blind spot. We see bias all around us but sometimes not in ourselves. This asymmetry hinders self-knowledge and fuels interpersonal misunderstanding and conflict. It is rooted in cognitive mechanics differentiating self- and social perception as well as in self-esteem motives. It generalizes across social, cognitive, and behavioral biases; begins in childhood; and appears across cultures. People show a bias blind spot in high-stakes contexts, including investing, medicine, human resources, and law. Strategies for addressing the problem are described.
{"title":"Humans’ Bias Blind Spot and Its Societal Significance","authors":"E. Pronin, Lori Hazel","doi":"10.1177/09637214231178745","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231178745","url":null,"abstract":"Human beings have a bias blind spot. We see bias all around us but sometimes not in ourselves. This asymmetry hinders self-knowledge and fuels interpersonal misunderstanding and conflict. It is rooted in cognitive mechanics differentiating self- and social perception as well as in self-esteem motives. It generalizes across social, cognitive, and behavioral biases; begins in childhood; and appears across cultures. People show a bias blind spot in high-stakes contexts, including investing, medicine, human resources, and law. Strategies for addressing the problem are described.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41834883","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-09DOI: 10.1177/09637214231173361
Melis Muradoglu, Sophie H. Arnold, S. Leslie, Andrei Cimpian
Why are some fields and occupations more diverse than others? In this review, we describe a conceptual framework—the field-specific ability beliefs (FAB) model—that provides a promising answer to this question. This model proposes that gender and racial/ethnic imbalances in a field or occupation result in part from the confluence of two beliefs: (a) the belief that success in that context requires high levels of intellectual ability (“brilliance”) and (b) the cultural stereotype that associates intellectual ability with (White) men more than other groups. We describe the FAB model and detail evidence for it, including evidence that the beliefs at its core are present even among children. We conclude by highlighting open questions.
{"title":"“What Does It Take to Succeed Here?”: The Belief That Success Requires Brilliance Is an Obstacle to Diversity","authors":"Melis Muradoglu, Sophie H. Arnold, S. Leslie, Andrei Cimpian","doi":"10.1177/09637214231173361","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231173361","url":null,"abstract":"Why are some fields and occupations more diverse than others? In this review, we describe a conceptual framework—the field-specific ability beliefs (FAB) model—that provides a promising answer to this question. This model proposes that gender and racial/ethnic imbalances in a field or occupation result in part from the confluence of two beliefs: (a) the belief that success in that context requires high levels of intellectual ability (“brilliance”) and (b) the cultural stereotype that associates intellectual ability with (White) men more than other groups. We describe the FAB model and detail evidence for it, including evidence that the beliefs at its core are present even among children. We conclude by highlighting open questions.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46308884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-01Epub Date: 2023-03-21DOI: 10.1177/09637214231162366
Katie Witkiewitz, Kevin E Vowles
Chronic pain and substance use disorders are both common, debilitating, and often persist over the longer term. On their own, each represents a significant health problem, with estimates indicating a substantial proportion of the adult population has chronic pain or a substance use disorder (SUD), and their co-occurrence is increasing. Chronic pain and SUD are also both often invisible, stigmatized disorders and persons with both regularly have difficulty accessing evidence-based treatments, particularly those that offer coordinated and integrated treatment for both conditions. But there is hope. Research is unraveling the mechanisms of chronic pain and substance use, as well as their co-occurrence, integrated behavioral treatment options based on acceptance- and mindfulness-based approaches are increasingly being developed and tested, government agencies are devoting more funds and resources to increase research on chronic pain and SUD, and there have been growing efforts in training, dissemination, and implementation of evidence-based treatments. At the very heart of the matter, though, is to recognize that everybody hurts sometimes, and treatments must empower people to life effectively with these experiences of being human.
{"title":"Everybody Hurts: Intersecting and Colliding Epidemics and the Need for Integrated Behavioral Treatment of Chronic Pain and Substance Use.","authors":"Katie Witkiewitz, Kevin E Vowles","doi":"10.1177/09637214231162366","DOIUrl":"10.1177/09637214231162366","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Chronic pain and substance use disorders are both common, debilitating, and often persist over the longer term. On their own, each represents a significant health problem, with estimates indicating a substantial proportion of the adult population has chronic pain or a substance use disorder (SUD), and their co-occurrence is increasing. Chronic pain and SUD are also both often invisible, stigmatized disorders and persons with both regularly have difficulty accessing evidence-based treatments, particularly those that offer coordinated and integrated treatment for both conditions. But there is hope. Research is unraveling the mechanisms of chronic pain and substance use, as well as their co-occurrence, integrated behavioral treatment options based on acceptance- and mindfulness-based approaches are increasingly being developed and tested, government agencies are devoting more funds and resources to increase research on chronic pain and SUD, and there have been growing efforts in training, dissemination, and implementation of evidence-based treatments. At the very heart of the matter, though, is to recognize that everybody hurts sometimes, and treatments must empower people to life effectively with these experiences of being human.</p>","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10465109/pdf/nihms-1876772.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10134131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-19DOI: 10.1177/09637214231159282
Elke U. Weber, S. Constantino, Maja Schlüter
Society is facing pressing interrelated, multilevel, and systemic challenges. Human consumption patterns are driving biodiversity loss and climate change, with unevenly distributed impacts that exacerbate preexisting inequalities. Structural or systems-level solutions to these challenges depend on group- and individual-level change, and vice versa. Although cognitive psychology has advanced our understanding of individual and group-level decision-making, it rarely links these microlevel processes and behaviors to network- and systems-level structures, resulting in a fragmented theory of how individual and collective action can drive broader social change. For example, psychology has established that physical, social, and historical contexts shape perception, reasoning, and decision-making but has largely ignored the dynamic and interdependent relationship between behavior and contexts. In this review, we urge researchers to move beyond a focus on static contexts and individual and group-level cognition to incorporate deeper theorizing about the temporal dynamics and feedbacks between individuals and the broader contexts in which they are embedded. We review literature emphasizing the role of context in shaping psychological processes as well as emerging research that considers individuals as embedded in complex adaptive systems. Complex adaptive systems frameworks are well suited to study the dynamic and interdependent relationship among individuals and the broader systems and structures they inhabit. The integration of research in psychology with these perspectives may thus offer traction in identifying solution pathways to complex, multilevel challenges by pointing to theories and methods that integrate across levels of analysis and account for coupled nature-society systems.
{"title":"Embedding Cognition: Judgment and Choice in an Interdependent and Dynamic World","authors":"Elke U. Weber, S. Constantino, Maja Schlüter","doi":"10.1177/09637214231159282","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231159282","url":null,"abstract":"Society is facing pressing interrelated, multilevel, and systemic challenges. Human consumption patterns are driving biodiversity loss and climate change, with unevenly distributed impacts that exacerbate preexisting inequalities. Structural or systems-level solutions to these challenges depend on group- and individual-level change, and vice versa. Although cognitive psychology has advanced our understanding of individual and group-level decision-making, it rarely links these microlevel processes and behaviors to network- and systems-level structures, resulting in a fragmented theory of how individual and collective action can drive broader social change. For example, psychology has established that physical, social, and historical contexts shape perception, reasoning, and decision-making but has largely ignored the dynamic and interdependent relationship between behavior and contexts. In this review, we urge researchers to move beyond a focus on static contexts and individual and group-level cognition to incorporate deeper theorizing about the temporal dynamics and feedbacks between individuals and the broader contexts in which they are embedded. We review literature emphasizing the role of context in shaping psychological processes as well as emerging research that considers individuals as embedded in complex adaptive systems. Complex adaptive systems frameworks are well suited to study the dynamic and interdependent relationship among individuals and the broader systems and structures they inhabit. The integration of research in psychology with these perspectives may thus offer traction in identifying solution pathways to complex, multilevel challenges by pointing to theories and methods that integrate across levels of analysis and account for coupled nature-society systems.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47038120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-19DOI: 10.1177/09637214231173095
T. Brennen, S. Magnussen
A reliable lie-detection method would be extremely useful in many situations but especially in forensic contexts. This review describes and evaluates the range of methods that have been studied. Humans are barely able to pick up lies on the basis of nonverbal cues; they do so more successfully with systematic methodologies that analyze verbal cues and with physiological and neuroscientific methods. However, the rates at which people are able to detect lies are still well below the legal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This means that the utmost caution must be exercised when such methods are employed. In investigations where independent evidence exists, there is emerging evidence that interviews based on a free account followed by the gradual introduction of the evidence by investigators can reveal inconsistencies in a guilty interviewee’s account. Automated machine-learning methods also hold some promise.
{"title":"Lie Detection: What Works?","authors":"T. Brennen, S. Magnussen","doi":"10.1177/09637214231173095","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231173095","url":null,"abstract":"A reliable lie-detection method would be extremely useful in many situations but especially in forensic contexts. This review describes and evaluates the range of methods that have been studied. Humans are barely able to pick up lies on the basis of nonverbal cues; they do so more successfully with systematic methodologies that analyze verbal cues and with physiological and neuroscientific methods. However, the rates at which people are able to detect lies are still well below the legal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt.” This means that the utmost caution must be exercised when such methods are employed. In investigations where independent evidence exists, there is emerging evidence that interviews based on a free account followed by the gradual introduction of the evidence by investigators can reveal inconsistencies in a guilty interviewee’s account. Automated machine-learning methods also hold some promise.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42862510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-06DOI: 10.1177/09637214231164404
J. Shepperd, R. Forsyth
We present a theoretical model that describes four explanations (mechanisms) why religious adolescents display less risk behavior than nonreligious adolescents. Specifically, religions affect the extent to which adolescents (a) have opportunities to engage in risk behavior, (b) find risk behavior appealing, (c) view risk behavior as morally acceptable, and (d) exert self-control over their impulses. These mechanisms are not unique to religions. However, our model identifies three features of religion that can nurture them. First, religions offer a worldview that can affect whether adolescents regard risk behavior as appealing and morally acceptable and can influence self-control. Second, central to most religions is a God that monitors and judges behavior, which can influence self-control and beliefs about what is appealing and morally acceptable. Third, religions provide a community of people who can limit opportunity to engage in risk behavior, influence the appeal and moral acceptability of risk behavior, and can foster self-control by providing support.
{"title":"How Does Religion Deter Adolescent Risk Behavior?","authors":"J. Shepperd, R. Forsyth","doi":"10.1177/09637214231164404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231164404","url":null,"abstract":"We present a theoretical model that describes four explanations (mechanisms) why religious adolescents display less risk behavior than nonreligious adolescents. Specifically, religions affect the extent to which adolescents (a) have opportunities to engage in risk behavior, (b) find risk behavior appealing, (c) view risk behavior as morally acceptable, and (d) exert self-control over their impulses. These mechanisms are not unique to religions. However, our model identifies three features of religion that can nurture them. First, religions offer a worldview that can affect whether adolescents regard risk behavior as appealing and morally acceptable and can influence self-control. Second, central to most religions is a God that monitors and judges behavior, which can influence self-control and beliefs about what is appealing and morally acceptable. Third, religions provide a community of people who can limit opportunity to engage in risk behavior, influence the appeal and moral acceptability of risk behavior, and can foster self-control by providing support.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41691570","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-06DOI: 10.1177/09637214231164038
Leigh Thompson
Virtual intelligence is “the ability to communicate and navigate relationships and achieve business goals when engaging with others who are not physically co-present.” Virtual intelligence is particularly critical in e-negotiations because negotiators compete to achieve economic goals but must cooperate to reach mutual agreement and maintain social relationships. I review key research findings on the advantages and disadvantages of virtual and in vivo negotiations. I make the point that in vivo negotiation does not always result in more trust and mutually beneficial outcomes than virtual negotiations. I use insights from research on e-negotiations and virtual communication to identify skills that facilitate trust and information sharing and lead to more desirable negotiation outcomes. I organize my discussion of virtual intelligence in terms of four key challenges that confront negotiators: relational concerns (building trust), conveyance (transmitting and receiving information), convergence (reaching a shared understanding of the situation), and achieving instrumental goals (negotiating a favorable outcome).
{"title":"The Virtually Intelligent Negotiator: Building Trust and Maximizing Economic Gain in E-Negotiations","authors":"Leigh Thompson","doi":"10.1177/09637214231164038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231164038","url":null,"abstract":"Virtual intelligence is “the ability to communicate and navigate relationships and achieve business goals when engaging with others who are not physically co-present.” Virtual intelligence is particularly critical in e-negotiations because negotiators compete to achieve economic goals but must cooperate to reach mutual agreement and maintain social relationships. I review key research findings on the advantages and disadvantages of virtual and in vivo negotiations. I make the point that in vivo negotiation does not always result in more trust and mutually beneficial outcomes than virtual negotiations. I use insights from research on e-negotiations and virtual communication to identify skills that facilitate trust and information sharing and lead to more desirable negotiation outcomes. I organize my discussion of virtual intelligence in terms of four key challenges that confront negotiators: relational concerns (building trust), conveyance (transmitting and receiving information), convergence (reaching a shared understanding of the situation), and achieving instrumental goals (negotiating a favorable outcome).","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42860425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-29DOI: 10.1177/09637214231166853
A. Moors
A sizeable minority of people engage, or have engaged, in some form of consensually nonmonogamous relationship (explicit mutual agreements to have multiple emotional, romantic, and/or sexual relationships). This article draws on current scientific knowledge to address five misconceptions about consensual nonmonogamy: (a) There is a “type” of person who engages in consensual nonmonogamy; (b) people engage in consensual nonmonogamy to “fix” their relationships issues and these relationships; (c) are low in quality, (d) promote the spread of sexually transmitted infections, and (e) are harmful to children. Yet, upon empirical scrutiny, popular misconceptions about consensual nonmonogamy are either not what they seem or, in many cases, contrary to people’s beliefs.
{"title":"Five Misconceptions About Consensually Nonmonogamous Relationships","authors":"A. Moors","doi":"10.1177/09637214231166853","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231166853","url":null,"abstract":"A sizeable minority of people engage, or have engaged, in some form of consensually nonmonogamous relationship (explicit mutual agreements to have multiple emotional, romantic, and/or sexual relationships). This article draws on current scientific knowledge to address five misconceptions about consensual nonmonogamy: (a) There is a “type” of person who engages in consensual nonmonogamy; (b) people engage in consensual nonmonogamy to “fix” their relationships issues and these relationships; (c) are low in quality, (d) promote the spread of sexually transmitted infections, and (e) are harmful to children. Yet, upon empirical scrutiny, popular misconceptions about consensual nonmonogamy are either not what they seem or, in many cases, contrary to people’s beliefs.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41420999","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-26DOI: 10.1177/09637214231168565
E. Wagenmakers, A. Sarafoglou, B. Aczel
Empirical claims are inevitably associated with uncertainty, and a major goal of data analysis is therefore to quantify that uncertainty. Recent work has revealed that most uncertainty may lie not in what is usually reported (e.g., p value, confidence interval, or Bayes factor) but in what is left unreported (e.g., how the experiment was designed, whether the conclusion is robust under plausible alternative analysis protocols, and how credible the authors believe their hypothesis to be). This suggests that the rigorous evaluation of an empirical claim involves an assessment of the entire empirical cycle and that scientific progress benefits from radical transparency in planning, data management, inference, and reporting. We summarize recent methodological developments in this area and conclude that the focus on a single statistical analysis is myopic. Sound statistical analysis is important, but social scientists may gain more insight by taking a broad view on uncertainty and by working to reduce the “unknown unknowns” that still plague reporting practice.
{"title":"Facing the Unknown Unknowns of Data Analysis","authors":"E. Wagenmakers, A. Sarafoglou, B. Aczel","doi":"10.1177/09637214231168565","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231168565","url":null,"abstract":"Empirical claims are inevitably associated with uncertainty, and a major goal of data analysis is therefore to quantify that uncertainty. Recent work has revealed that most uncertainty may lie not in what is usually reported (e.g., p value, confidence interval, or Bayes factor) but in what is left unreported (e.g., how the experiment was designed, whether the conclusion is robust under plausible alternative analysis protocols, and how credible the authors believe their hypothesis to be). This suggests that the rigorous evaluation of an empirical claim involves an assessment of the entire empirical cycle and that scientific progress benefits from radical transparency in planning, data management, inference, and reporting. We summarize recent methodological developments in this area and conclude that the focus on a single statistical analysis is myopic. Sound statistical analysis is important, but social scientists may gain more insight by taking a broad view on uncertainty and by working to reduce the “unknown unknowns” that still plague reporting practice.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48588292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-20DOI: 10.1177/09637214231158345
Jorge Morales, C. Firestone
Perception is our primary means of accessing the external world. What is the nature of this core mental process? Although this question is at the center of scientific research on perception, it has also long been explored by philosophers, who ask fundamental questions about our capacity to perceive: Do our different senses represent the world in commensurable ways? How much of our environment are we aware of at one time? Which aspects of perception are “objective” and which “subjective”? What properties count as perceptual in the first place? Although these parallel research programs typically proceed independently in contemporary scholarship, previous eras recognized more active collaboration across philosophical and scientific approaches to perception. Here, we review an emerging research focus that aims to reunite these approaches by putting long-standing philosophical questions to empirical test. Unlike more general philosophical inspiration, this work draws a direct line from prominent philosophical conjectures or thought experiments about perception to key tests in the laboratory—such that the relevant experimental work would not (and even could not) have proceeded as it did without the preceding philosophical discussion. Finally, we explore themes arising from these interactions and point to further philosophical questions that might be amenable to empirical approaches.
{"title":"Philosophy of Perception in the Psychologist’s Laboratory","authors":"Jorge Morales, C. Firestone","doi":"10.1177/09637214231158345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214231158345","url":null,"abstract":"Perception is our primary means of accessing the external world. What is the nature of this core mental process? Although this question is at the center of scientific research on perception, it has also long been explored by philosophers, who ask fundamental questions about our capacity to perceive: Do our different senses represent the world in commensurable ways? How much of our environment are we aware of at one time? Which aspects of perception are “objective” and which “subjective”? What properties count as perceptual in the first place? Although these parallel research programs typically proceed independently in contemporary scholarship, previous eras recognized more active collaboration across philosophical and scientific approaches to perception. Here, we review an emerging research focus that aims to reunite these approaches by putting long-standing philosophical questions to empirical test. Unlike more general philosophical inspiration, this work draws a direct line from prominent philosophical conjectures or thought experiments about perception to key tests in the laboratory—such that the relevant experimental work would not (and even could not) have proceeded as it did without the preceding philosophical discussion. Finally, we explore themes arising from these interactions and point to further philosophical questions that might be amenable to empirical approaches.","PeriodicalId":10802,"journal":{"name":"Current Directions in Psychological Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45499880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：