Beyond Newton: Why assumptions of universality are critical to cognitive science, and how to finally move past them.

Kroupin, Ivan; Davis, Helen E.; Henrich, Joseph

doi:10.1037/rev0000480

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 149 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The study of psychological processes in the laboratory remains, in our view, an indispensable tool in a science of mind. The exploration of variation of these processes in the wild is interesting and socially desirable, but it is not essential (Krueger, 2023; but see Kroupin et al, 2024). 2…”

Section: Sufficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the input level, for example, different types of social distance metrics can be fruitful for the exploration of the robustness of differential projection (Koch and colleagues). Likewise, the study of cultural differences is of abiding interest (Kroupin et al, 2024). It would be interesting to see if the heightened ingroup favoritism in collectivist, as compared with individualist, cultures (Chen et al, 1998) can be explained by a differential combination of self-images and social projection, or by other, culture-bound, variations in cognition (Varnum et al, 2010).…”

Section: Timelinessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inductive Reasoning Renewed: A Reply to Commentators

Krueger,

Grüning,

Heck

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The IRM is designed to provide a disciplined and flexible framework for the study the social-perceptual phenomena of self-enhancement, intergroup accentuation, ingroup-favoritism, and differential accuracy of group perception, and the associations among these phenomena. The commentaries on the target article individually and collectively point to opportunities to further develop the model and to situate it in the context of contemporary theory and research in social and cognitive psychology. There are, of course, also critical and skeptical comments, which we address in this rejoinder. We organize our arguments by considering four themes of discussion: the model’s coherence, falsifiability, sufficiency, and timeliness. We close by suggesting that the IRM, beyond its proper domain of applicability represents a way of thinking about social perception characterized by parsimonious assumptions and precise predictions.

show abstract

Section: Sufficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%