Darren Frey

Ph.D

2014/10-2017/11

Ph.D student

Paris Descartes University

The identification of individual-specific conflict detection sensitivities

Supervised by Wim de Neys

Abstract :

Recent state of the art research into cognitive biases has revealed that individuals often detect that they are making certain reasoning errors even when they themselves do not, perhaps cannot, articulate the source of the error. Until now, this research has focused primarily on demonstrating the existence of conflict detection tendencies among even the most biased reasoners. This thesis builds on this research by analyzing three related and unexplored areas of inquiry: (1) subtypes of conflict detection; (2) individual-specific differences among detectors; and (3) the domain generality or specificity of conflict detection sensitivities. By identifying increasingly fine-tuned detection subtypes, the project aims to explore correlations between particular conflict detection sensitivities and other cognitive predictors. It is, essentially, preparatory work for a complete differential analysis of conflict detection sensitivities among reasoners.

press to zoom

press to zoom

press to zoom
1/2

PUBLICATIONS

Bago, B., Frey, D., Vidal, J., Houdé, O., Borst, G., De Neys, W. (2018). Fast and slow thinking: Electrophysiological evidence for early conflict sensitivity. Neuropsychologia, 117, 483-490.

Frey, D. (2017). Faulty logic. Science, 356(6338), 589. (commentaire)

Frey, D., Johnson, E. D., De Neys, W. (2017). Individual differences in conflict detection during reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 5, 1-52.

Frey, D. (2017). The identification of individual-specific conflict detection sensitivities. [Doctoral dissertation, Université Paris Descartes]

Frey, D., De Neys, W., Bago, B. (2016). The jury of intuition: Conflict detection and intuitive processing. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 5, 335-337.

Frey, D.P., Gamond, L. (2015). Second language feedback reduces the hot hand fallacy, But why? Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 11766-11768. (commentaire)