False categories in cognition: the Not-The-Liver fallacy
This paper reports on an increasingly frequent error committed in cognition research that at best slows progress, and at worse leads to self-perpetuating false claims and misguided research. The error involves how we identify meaningful processes and categories on the basis of data. Examples are giv...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Cognition 1997-09, Vol.64 (3), p.231-248 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 248 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 231 |
| container_title | Cognition |
| container_volume | 64 |
| creator | Bedford, Felice L. |
| description | This paper reports on an increasingly frequent error committed in cognition research that at best slows progress, and at worse leads to self-perpetuating false claims and misguided research. The error involves how we identify meaningful processes and categories on the basis of data. Examples are given from three areas of cognition: (1) memory, where the misconception has fueled the popular implicit/explicit categories, (2) perception, where the misconception is used to re-evaluate the classic what/where division, and (3) motor skills, where it is used to draw conclusions from patients with Huntington's disease. Reasons for the prevalence of this error, how it relates to double dissociations, and what it suggests about scientific reasoning are offered. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00019-X |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79507308</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S001002779700019X</els_id><sourcerecordid>1877072364</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-27eb001c9e144555d6495b9fe1df96a8b526a51516e4056b5b031ce33d68e1363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMtKAzEUhoMoWi-PIAwooovRZHKbuBEpVoWiCxXchUzmjKa0k5pMC3170wtduHF1OJzvP_x8CJ0SfE0wETdvGBOc40LKSyWvcNpU_rmDeqSUNJclLXdRb4scoMMYRwlihSz30b5iheC46KFyYMYRMms6-PLBQcxcm1n_1brO-fY2674he_Fd_v4N-dDNIWSNGY-NXRyjvWYZPdnMI_QxeHjvP-XD18fn_v0wt0ywLi8kVKmFVUAY45zXgileqQZI3ShhyooXwnDCiQCGuah4hSmxQGktSiBU0CN0sf47Df5nBrHTExctpA4t-FnUUnEsKS4TePYHHPlZaFM3nZRILAsqWKL4mrLBxxig0dPgJiYsNMF66VWvvOqlNK2kXnnVnyl3uvk-qyZQb1Mbkel-vrmbaM24Caa1Lm6xgnFJpEzY3RqDpGzuIOhoHbQWahfAdrr27p8iv5nckSA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1877072364</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>False categories in cognition: the Not-The-Liver fallacy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Bedford, Felice L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bedford, Felice L.</creatorcontrib><description>This paper reports on an increasingly frequent error committed in cognition research that at best slows progress, and at worse leads to self-perpetuating false claims and misguided research. The error involves how we identify meaningful processes and categories on the basis of data. Examples are given from three areas of cognition: (1) memory, where the misconception has fueled the popular implicit/explicit categories, (2) perception, where the misconception is used to re-evaluate the classic what/where division, and (3) motor skills, where it is used to draw conclusions from patients with Huntington's disease. Reasons for the prevalence of this error, how it relates to double dissociations, and what it suggests about scientific reasoning are offered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-0277</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-7838</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00019-X</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9426502</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CGTNAU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Cognition ; Cognition - classification ; Cognitive Science - methods ; Cognitive Science - standards ; Humans ; Linguistics ; Logic ; Memory - classification ; Motor Skills - classification ; Psycholinguistics ; Terminology as Topic ; Visual Perception - classification</subject><ispartof>Cognition, 1997-09, Vol.64 (3), p.231-248</ispartof><rights>1997 Elsevier Science B.V.</rights><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-27eb001c9e144555d6495b9fe1df96a8b526a51516e4056b5b031ce33d68e1363</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-27eb001c9e144555d6495b9fe1df96a8b526a51516e4056b5b031ce33d68e1363</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00019-X$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27869,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2457177$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9426502$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bedford, Felice L.</creatorcontrib><title>False categories in cognition: the Not-The-Liver fallacy</title><title>Cognition</title><addtitle>Cognition</addtitle><description>This paper reports on an increasingly frequent error committed in cognition research that at best slows progress, and at worse leads to self-perpetuating false claims and misguided research. The error involves how we identify meaningful processes and categories on the basis of data. Examples are given from three areas of cognition: (1) memory, where the misconception has fueled the popular implicit/explicit categories, (2) perception, where the misconception is used to re-evaluate the classic what/where division, and (3) motor skills, where it is used to draw conclusions from patients with Huntington's disease. Reasons for the prevalence of this error, how it relates to double dissociations, and what it suggests about scientific reasoning are offered.</description><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognition - classification</subject><subject>Cognitive Science - methods</subject><subject>Cognitive Science - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Memory - classification</subject><subject>Motor Skills - classification</subject><subject>Psycholinguistics</subject><subject>Terminology as Topic</subject><subject>Visual Perception - classification</subject><issn>0010-0277</issn><issn>1873-7838</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkMtKAzEUhoMoWi-PIAwooovRZHKbuBEpVoWiCxXchUzmjKa0k5pMC3170wtduHF1OJzvP_x8CJ0SfE0wETdvGBOc40LKSyWvcNpU_rmDeqSUNJclLXdRb4scoMMYRwlihSz30b5iheC46KFyYMYRMms6-PLBQcxcm1n_1brO-fY2674he_Fd_v4N-dDNIWSNGY-NXRyjvWYZPdnMI_QxeHjvP-XD18fn_v0wt0ywLi8kVKmFVUAY45zXgileqQZI3ShhyooXwnDCiQCGuah4hSmxQGktSiBU0CN0sf47Df5nBrHTExctpA4t-FnUUnEsKS4TePYHHPlZaFM3nZRILAsqWKL4mrLBxxig0dPgJiYsNMF66VWvvOqlNK2kXnnVnyl3uvk-qyZQb1Mbkel-vrmbaM24Caa1Lm6xgnFJpEzY3RqDpGzuIOhoHbQWahfAdrr27p8iv5nckSA</recordid><startdate>19970901</startdate><enddate>19970901</enddate><creator>Bedford, Felice L.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier Science</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>JQCIK</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19970901</creationdate><title>False categories in cognition: the Not-The-Liver fallacy</title><author>Bedford, Felice L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-27eb001c9e144555d6495b9fe1df96a8b526a51516e4056b5b031ce33d68e1363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognition - classification</topic><topic>Cognitive Science - methods</topic><topic>Cognitive Science - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Memory - classification</topic><topic>Motor Skills - classification</topic><topic>Psycholinguistics</topic><topic>Terminology as Topic</topic><topic>Visual Perception - classification</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bedford, Felice L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 33</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bedford, Felice L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>False categories in cognition: the Not-The-Liver fallacy</atitle><jtitle>Cognition</jtitle><addtitle>Cognition</addtitle><date>1997-09-01</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>231</spage><epage>248</epage><pages>231-248</pages><issn>0010-0277</issn><eissn>1873-7838</eissn><coden>CGTNAU</coden><abstract>This paper reports on an increasingly frequent error committed in cognition research that at best slows progress, and at worse leads to self-perpetuating false claims and misguided research. The error involves how we identify meaningful processes and categories on the basis of data. Examples are given from three areas of cognition: (1) memory, where the misconception has fueled the popular implicit/explicit categories, (2) perception, where the misconception is used to re-evaluate the classic what/where division, and (3) motor skills, where it is used to draw conclusions from patients with Huntington's disease. Reasons for the prevalence of this error, how it relates to double dissociations, and what it suggests about scientific reasoning are offered.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>9426502</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00019-X</doi><tpages>18</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0010-0277 |
| ispartof | Cognition, 1997-09, Vol.64 (3), p.231-248 |
| issn | 0010-0277 1873-7838 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79507308 |
| source | MEDLINE; Periodicals Index Online; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
| subjects | Cognition Cognition - classification Cognitive Science - methods Cognitive Science - standards Humans Linguistics Logic Memory - classification Motor Skills - classification Psycholinguistics Terminology as Topic Visual Perception - classification |
| title | False categories in cognition: the Not-The-Liver fallacy |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T02%3A55%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=False%20categories%20in%20cognition:%20the%20Not-The-Liver%20fallacy&rft.jtitle=Cognition&rft.au=Bedford,%20Felice%20L.&rft.date=1997-09-01&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=248&rft.pages=231-248&rft.issn=0010-0277&rft.eissn=1873-7838&rft.coden=CGTNAU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0010-0277(97)00019-X&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1877072364%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1877072364&rft_id=info:pmid/9426502&rft_els_id=S001002779700019X&rfr_iscdi=true |