Explanatory coherence in social explanations : a parallel distributed processing account

By Stephen J. Read, Amy Marcus-Newhall. 1993

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences (2017, methodology): “Read and Marcus-Newhall [153] tested the hypotheses from Thagard’s theory of explanatory coherence [171] that people prefer simpler and more general explanations.”
Temporal construal. (2003, background): “…conceptual structures, some features are assumed to be more closely related to the perceived essence of things and have greater explanatory power than other more peripheral features (Keil, 1989; Kunda & Thagard, 1996; Murphy, 1993; S. J. Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993; Rips, 1989; Thagard, 1989).”
Hierarchical interpretations for neural network predictions (2018, background): “Hierarchical importance Results from psychology and philosophy suggest that people prefer explanations that are simple but informative [36, 37] and include the appropriate amount of detail [38].”
Developing the changes in attitude about the relevance of science (CARS) questionnaire and assessing two high school science classes (2003, background): “a statement has from accepted sources, the more believable it is. The theory and ECHO were tested empirically and were repeatedly found to be effective predictors of subjects’ beliefs in various domains ( Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993; Schank & Ranney, 1991, 1992).”
Reconciling contextualism with the core assumptions of personality psychology (2000, background): “…sciences, including analogical reasoning (Spellman and Holyoak, 1992), attitude change (Spellman, Ullman and Holyoak, 1993), explanatory coherence (Read and Marcus-Newhall, 1993; Thagard, 1989), dissonance reduction (Read and Miller, 1994; Shultz and Lepper, 1996), and impression formation and…”
How does the mind construct and represent stories (2002, background): “In the theoretical language of attribution theory, these are the motives, dispositions, traits, and situational events that explain why agents perform actions (Alicke, 1992; Burger, 1981; Hilton, Smith, & Kim, 1995; Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993).”
The Instrumental Value of Explanations (2011, background): “For example, there is evidence that people prefer explanations that account for a larger number of observations (Thagard 1989; Read and Marcus-Newhall 1993; Preston and Epley 2005), that appeal to functions and goals (Kelemen 1999; Lombrozo et al. 2007), and that fit more coherently into a…”
Explaining by Removing: A Unified Framework for Model Explanation (2020, background): “Richer information may not always be desirable, because psychology research shows that people report higher satisfaction with explanations that cite fewer causes (Thagard, 1989; Read and Marcus-Newhall, 1993; Lombrozo, 2007; Miller, 2019).”
The Formation of Opportunity Beliefs: Overcoming Ignorance and Reducing Doubt (2007, methodology): “These meta-representations of the environment are then matched with sensory representations for comparison to determine the extent to which they form a coherent whole (Read and Marcus-Newhall, 1993; Thagard, 1989, 1992, 2001).”
Structural Dynamics of Cognition: From Consistency Theories to Constraint Satisfaction (2002, methodology): “…processes, including analogical mapping (the ACME model of Holyoak & Thagard, 1989; Spellman & Holyoak, 1992), evaluation of competing explanations (the ECHO model of Thagard, 1989, 1992; see also Read & Marcus-Newhall, 1993), and decision making (the DECO model of Thagard & Millgram, 1995).”