Abstract
Phillips et al. conclude that current evidence supports knowledge-, but not belief-reasoning as being automatic. We suggest four reasons why this is an oversimplified answer to a question that might not have a clear-cut answer: (1) knowledge and beliefs can be incompletely equated to perceptual states, (2) sensitivity to mental states does not necessitate representation, (3) automaticity is not a single categorical feature, and (4) how we represent others' minds is dependent on social context.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | e172 |
Journal | Behavioural and Brain Sciences |
Volume | 44 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 19 Nov 2021 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
- Physiology
- Behavioral Neuroscience