In a previous article published in Perspectives, I questioned whether the debate between dual- and single-process models of thinking is empirically tractable and argued that psychological scientists should leave it behind. Dewey (this issue) suggests that by reframing the debate in cognitive-modeling terms, it might become tractable and consequential. More specifically, he proposes that focusing on the question of whether analytic engagement (i.e., the process by which additional resources are allocated to a reasoning problem) is discrete or continuous might allow us to settle the debate. Here I illustrate how this suggestion is likely to face the same tractability problems as the original defining-features approach that it is supposed to replace.

在之前发表在Perspectives上的一篇文章中，我质疑双过程和单过程思维模型之间的争论在经验上是否易于处理，并认为心理学科学家应该把它抛在脑后。杜威（本期）建议，通过以认知建模术语重新构建辩论，它可能会变得容易处理且具有重要意义。更具体地说，他建议关注分析参与（即，将额外资源分配给推理问题的过程）是离散的还是连续的问题，这可能会让我们解决争论。在这里，我说明了这个建议如何可能面临与它应该取代的原始定义特征方法相同的易处理性问题。