Cited by 52Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsEmbodied and Extended CognitionCognitive Science and Education Research

Dual Process Theory: Embodied and Predictive; Symbolic and Classical

Open access
Bellini-Leite, Samuel C.·2022·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Dual Process Theory is currently a popular theory for explaining why we show bounded rationality in reasoning and decision-making tasks. This theory proposes there must be a sharp distinction in thinking to explain two clusters of correlational features. One cluster describes a fast and intuitive process (Type 1), while the other describes a slow and reflective one (Type 2). A problem for this theory is identifying a common principle that binds these features together, explaining why they form a unity, the unity problem. To solve it, a hypothesis is developed combining embodied predictive processing with symbolic classical approaches. The hypothesis, simplified, states that Type 1 processes are bound together because they rely on embodied predictive processing whereas Type 2 processes form a unity because they are accomplished by symbolic classical cognition. To show that this is likely the case, the features of Dual Process Theory are discussed in relation to these frameworks.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.805386

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The reliance on Dual Process Theory (DPT) may not accurately represent the cognition processes involved in clinical decision-making.

    “the reliance on the Dual Process Theory (DPT)42 may not accurately represent the cognition processes involved in clinical decision-making.”

    From Large Language Models lack essential metacognition for reliable medical reasoning (2025) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Features of Dual Process Theory section says DPT’s features have been criticized as poorly defined, and the Conclusion says the theory needs further development. Those passages support caution about relying on DPT, but the paper does not assess whether it accurately represents cognition in clinical decision-making specifically. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Bellini-Leite S. C. (2017). “ The revisionist strategy in cognitive science,” in Cognitive science: Recent Advances And Recurring Problems, eds Adams F. Pessoa O. Kogler J. E. (Wilmington, DE: Vernon press), 265– 276.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bellini-Leite, S. C.
Affiliations
Universidade do Estado de Minas Gerais (BR)
Corresponding author
Bellini-Leite, Samuel C.
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2022-03-21
Volume
13
Pages
805386-805386
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4221116607
Cited by
52
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
FWCI
6.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Cognitive Science and Education Research
Keywords
dual-process theory, bounded rationality, intuitive thinking, decision-making, fast and slow thinking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review