Automatic and controlled processing in social psychology
Can automatic and controlled processing be softened?
From a conceptual point of view, the present study suggests that the classical distinction between automatic and controlled processing as separable processes can be softened, as the automatic processes can gradually become flexible and context-dependent, as shown in this work
What is automatic and controlled processing?
Modeling of automatic and controlled processing The modeling of automatic and controlled processing has been an active forum in cognitive science over the past 25 years
The initial Schneider and Shiffrin (1977) models provided quantitative account of the behavioral data of controlled processing search accuracy and reaction time effects
What is controlled processing in psychology?
Subject to Practice: With practice and repetition, tasks initially requiring controlled processing can become automatic, faster, less effortful, and can be performed unconsciously
Controlled processing in psychology is a form of information processing that requires active conscious attention and effort
×Controlled and automatic processing are two distinct ways of social thought. Automatic processing is fast, effortless, and often unconscious, and it relies on intuition and heuristics. Controlled processing is slow, effortful, and conscious, and it involves systematic and logical reasoning. Controlled processing is more likely to occur when the situation is complex, ambiguous, or when the individual is motivated to be accurate in their judgments.
Automatic and controlled processing in social psychology
Theory of human moral judgment
Dual process theory within moral psychology is an influential theory of human moral judgment that posits that human beings possess two distinct cognitive subsystems that compete in moral reasoning processes: one fast, intuitive and emotionally-driven, the other slow, requiring conscious deliberation and a higher cognitive load. Initially proposed by Joshua Greene along with Brian Sommerville, Leigh Nystrom, John Darley, Jonathan David Cohen and others, the theory can be seen as a domain-specific example of more general dual process accounts in psychology, such as Daniel Kahneman's system1/system 2 distinction popularised in his book, Thinking, Fast and Slow. Greene has often emphasized the normative implications of the theory, which has started an extensive debate in ethics.
Social information processing theory
Social information processing theory, also known as SIP, is a psychological and sociological theory originally developed by Salancik and Pfeffer in 1978. This theory explores how individuals make decisions and form attitudes in a social context, often focusing on the workplace. It suggests that people rely heavily on the social information available to them in their environments, including input from colleagues and peers, to shape their attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions.
Dual process theory within moral psychology is an influential theory of human
Theory of human moral judgment
Dual process theory within moral psychology is an influential theory of human moral judgment that posits that human beings possess two distinct cognitive subsystems that compete in moral reasoning processes: one fast, intuitive and emotionally-driven, the other slow, requiring conscious deliberation and a higher cognitive load. Initially proposed by Joshua Greene along with Brian Sommerville, Leigh Nystrom, John Darley, Jonathan David Cohen and others, the theory can be seen as a domain-specific example of more general dual process accounts in psychology, such as Daniel Kahneman's system1/system 2 distinction popularised in his book, Thinking, Fast and Slow. Greene has often emphasized the normative implications of the theory, which has started an extensive debate in ethics.
Social information processing theory
Social information processing theory, also known as SIP, is a psychological and sociological theory originally developed by Salancik and Pfeffer in 1978. This theory explores how individuals make decisions and form attitudes in a social context, often focusing on the workplace. It suggests that people rely heavily on the social information available to them in their environments, including input from colleagues and peers, to shape their attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions.
