Concepts at the interface; dual process theory at a crossroads

In Concepts at the Interface, Shea characterizes concepts as “plug and play devices” that seamlessly integrate information from across our psychology. They are thus positioned to orchestrate heterogeneous thought processes, ranging from general reasoning that depends on the language-like compositionality of conceptual representations, to the construction of multimodal simulations based on highly specific knowledge and experience. I will argue here that Shea’s account can help reinvigorate an influential but beleaguered paradigm in cognitive science: dual process theory. Drawing on Shea’s analysis, I explore three ways of distinguishing between type 1 “intuitive” processing and type 2 “reflective” processing. In the pluralistic spirit of his book, I show how each of these distinctions (and potentially others) could explain different portions of the empirical data.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophical Psychology
Published
2025-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2025.2584455
Primary Topic
Embodied and Extended Cognition
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Concepts at the interface; dual process theory at a crossroads

Sarah A. Fisher
Philosophical Psychology
Embodied and Extended Cognition
article

Concepts at the interface; dual process theory at a crossroads

Sarah A. Fisher
article en

Abstract

In Concepts at the Interface, Shea characterizes concepts as “plug and play devices” that seamlessly integrate information from across our psychology. They are thus positioned to orchestrate heterogeneous thought processes, ranging from general reasoning that depends on the language-like compositionality of conceptual representations, to the construction of multimodal simulations based on highly specific knowledge and experience. I will argue here that Shea’s account can help reinvigorate an influential but beleaguered paradigm in cognitive science: dual process theory. Drawing on Shea’s analysis, I explore three ways of distinguishing between type 1 “intuitive” processing and type 2 “reflective” processing. In the pluralistic spirit of his book, I show how each of these distinctions (and potentially others) could explain different portions of the empirical data.

Philosophical Psychology
Cardiff University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Embodied and Extended Cognition
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.