No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Responsibility: Cognitive fragments and collaborative coherence?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 March 2018
Abstract
We describe additional research that expands upon many of Doris's points, focusing on collaboration (Ch. 5), selves, and identity (Ch. 8). We also suggest some elaboration of his treatment of dual process theories (Ch. 3). Finally, we ask whether collaborationist accounts confer logical consistency.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018
References
Bargh, J. A. (1994) The Four Horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, efficiency, intention, and control in social cognition. In: Handbook of social cognition, 2nd edition, ed. Wyer, R. S. Jr. & Srull, T. K., pp. 1–40. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Doris, J. M. (2015b). Talking to our selves: Reflection, ignorance, and agency. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Förster, J., Liberman, N. & Friedman, R. S. (2009) What do we prime? On distinguishing between semantic priming, procedural priming, and goal priming. In: The Oxford handbook of human action, ed. Morsella, E., Bargh, J. A. & Gollwitzer, P. M., pp. 173–93. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Granot, Y., Balcetis, E., Schneider, K. E. & Tyler, T. R. (2014) Justice is not blind: Visual attention exaggerates effects of group identification on legal punishment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
143:2196–208. doi:10.1037/a0037893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granot, Y., Uleman, J. S. & Balcetis, E. (under review) The “I” in victim: Just world beliefs and self-relevance as necessary conditions for victim blame. New York University.Google Scholar
Haan, N. (1978) Two moralities in action contexts: Relationships to thought, ego regulation, and development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
36(3):286–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ham, J. & Van den Bos, K. (2008) Not fair for me! The influence of personal relevance on social justice inferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
44:699–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassin, R. R., Ochsner, K. N. & Trope, Y., eds. (2010) Self-control in society, mind, and brain (Social cognition and social neuroscience). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hong, Y-y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C-y. & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000) Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist
55(7):709–20. doi: l0.l037//0003-066X.55.7.709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jacoby, L. L. (1991) A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language
30:513–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, H. R. & Kitayama, S. (1991) Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review
98:224–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mercier, H. & Sperber, D. (2011) Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences
34:57–111. doi:10.1017/S0140525X10000968.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. G. (1984) Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
46(5):961–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I. & Norenzayan, A. (2001) Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review
108(2):291–310. doi: 10.1037//0033-295X.108.2.291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shimizu, Y., Lee, H. & Uleman, J. S. (2017) Culture as automatic processes for making meaning: Spontaneous trait inferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
69(1):79–85. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2016.08.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todorov, A. & Uleman, J. S. (2004) The person reference process in spontaneous trait inferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
87:482–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uleman, J. K. (2010) An introduction to Kant's moral philosophy. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uleman, J. S. (2015) Causes and causal attributions: Questions raised by Dave Hamilton and spontaneous trait inferences. In: Social perception: From individuals to groups, ed. Stroessner, S. J. & Sherman, J. W., pp. 52–70. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Uleman, J. S., Rim, S., Saribay, S. A. & Kressel, L. M. (2012) Controversies, questions, and prospects for spontaneous social inferences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass
6:657–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Target article
Précis of Talking to Our Selves: Reflection, Ignorance, and Agency
Related commentaries (28)
A limited skeptical threat
A related proposal: An interactionist perspective on reason
Acknowledging and managing deep constraints on moral agency and the self
Acting without knowledge
Agency enhancement and social psychology
Agency is realized by subpersonal mechanisms too
Another rescue mission: Does it make sense?
Getting by with a little help from our friends
Grounding responsibility in something (more) solid
Innate valuation, existential framing, and one head for multiple moral hats
Learning to talk to ourselves: Development, ignorance, and agency
Manipulation, oppression, and the deep self
Moral agency among the ruins
Negotiating responsibility
On properly characterizing moral agency
Responsibility: Cognitive fragments and collaborative coherence?
Seeing for ourselves: Insights into the development of moral behaviour from models of visual perception and misperception
Talking to others' selves: Why a valuational paradigm of agency fails to provide an adequate theoretical framework for moral responsibility, social accountability, and legal liability
Talking to others: The importance of responsibility attributions by observers
The dark side of dialog
The Nietzschean precedent for anti-reflective, dialogical agency
The participatory dimension of individual responsibility
The practice of everyday life provides supporters and inviters of morally responsible agency
The tangled web of agency
To kill a bee: The aptness and moralistic heuristics of reactive attitudes
What does agency afford the self?
Why value values?
“Defeaters” don't matter
Author response
Collaborating agents: Values, sociality, and moral responsibility