Article contents
Omissions, conflations, and false dichotomies: Conceptual and empirical problems with the Barbey & Sloman account
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 October 2007
Abstract
Both the theoretical frameworks that organize the first part of Barbey & Sloman's (B&S's) target article and the empirical evidence marshaled in the second part are marked by distinctions that should not exist (i.e., false dichotomies), conflations where distinctions should be made, and selective omissions of empirical results – within the very studies discussed – that create illusions of theoretical and empirical favor.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007
References
- 3
- Cited by