“探索思考和发展员工实践的新方法:思维方式的作用”评论

IF 0.5 Q4 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Tizard Learning Disability Review Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.1108/TLDR-03-2021-0007
L. Wijnroks
{"title":"“探索思考和发展员工实践的新方法:思维方式的作用”评论","authors":"L. Wijnroks","doi":"10.1108/TLDR-03-2021-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on “Exploring new ways of thinking about and developing staff practice: the role of modes of thinking” written by Roy Deveau, John Ockenden and Petra Bjorne.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe commentary considers the consistency of Kahneman’s model of thinking fast and slow with brain research.\n\n\nFindings\nThe thinking styles of staff undoubtedly influence their responses to people with learning disabilities. Although Kahneman’s model provides a heuristic approach to tackling prejudicial and biased thinking, it risks incomplete solutions through bypassing some of the factors contributing to staff behaviour.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis commentary concludes that Kahneman’s model is not completely consistent with knowledge about how the brain is organized. This should be regarded as a limitation of any model seeking to explain decision-making.\n","PeriodicalId":54179,"journal":{"name":"Tizard Learning Disability Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Commentary on “Exploring new ways of thinking about and developing staff practice: the role of modes of thinking”\",\"authors\":\"L. Wijnroks\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/TLDR-03-2021-0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on “Exploring new ways of thinking about and developing staff practice: the role of modes of thinking” written by Roy Deveau, John Ockenden and Petra Bjorne.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe commentary considers the consistency of Kahneman’s model of thinking fast and slow with brain research.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe thinking styles of staff undoubtedly influence their responses to people with learning disabilities. Although Kahneman’s model provides a heuristic approach to tackling prejudicial and biased thinking, it risks incomplete solutions through bypassing some of the factors contributing to staff behaviour.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis commentary concludes that Kahneman’s model is not completely consistent with knowledge about how the brain is organized. This should be regarded as a limitation of any model seeking to explain decision-making.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":54179,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tizard Learning Disability Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tizard Learning Disability Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/TLDR-03-2021-0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tizard Learning Disability Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/TLDR-03-2021-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的本文旨在对Roy Deveau、John Ockenden和Petra Bjorne撰写的《探索思考和发展员工实践的新方法:思维模式的作用》一书进行评论。设计/方法论/方法评论认为卡尼曼的快速和慢速思维模型与大脑研究的一致性。发现员工的思维方式无疑会影响他们对有学习障碍的人的反应。尽管Kahneman的模型提供了一种启发式方法来解决偏见和偏见思维,但它可能会绕过一些导致员工行为的因素,从而导致解决方案不完整。原创性/价值这篇评论的结论是,卡尼曼的模型与关于大脑如何组织的知识并不完全一致。这应该被视为任何试图解释决策的模型的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Commentary on “Exploring new ways of thinking about and developing staff practice: the role of modes of thinking”
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on “Exploring new ways of thinking about and developing staff practice: the role of modes of thinking” written by Roy Deveau, John Ockenden and Petra Bjorne. Design/methodology/approach The commentary considers the consistency of Kahneman’s model of thinking fast and slow with brain research. Findings The thinking styles of staff undoubtedly influence their responses to people with learning disabilities. Although Kahneman’s model provides a heuristic approach to tackling prejudicial and biased thinking, it risks incomplete solutions through bypassing some of the factors contributing to staff behaviour. Originality/value This commentary concludes that Kahneman’s model is not completely consistent with knowledge about how the brain is organized. This should be regarded as a limitation of any model seeking to explain decision-making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tizard Learning Disability Review
Tizard Learning Disability Review EDUCATION, SPECIAL-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
16.70%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
The effects of changing the classroom play environment on the peer interactions of autistic children with an intellectual disability Using the children’s accelerated trauma technique with adults with intellectual disabilities Commentary on “The effects of changing the classroom play environment on the peer interactions of autistic children with an intellectual disability” Frontline managers’ experiences of practice leadership for when supporting autistic adults with complex support needs residing in community housing Commentary on “Stakeholder experiences of deprescribing psychotropic medicines for challenging behaviour in people with intellectual disabilities”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1