1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Consciousness

Consciousness

New perspectives, artificial consciousness, and the scientific progress of psychology

image of Consciousness
USD
Buy:$163.00 + Taxes

The book discusses consciousness and several theories that attempt to explain the phenomenon. So far, no one has been able to explain how the brain creates consciousness, mainly because no way has been discovered to measure it. The book’s main innovations are as follows:(1) A coherent treatment of two types of explanatory models relevant to consciousness. The first, a mechanistic model, is used in the natural sciences and has been accepted in psychology. The second, a mentalistic model, is based on the individual's inner world (e.g., will, belief, intention).(2) Description of a theoretical model which proposes that sensory stimulation is initially processed automatically and unconsciously, and explains the transition from non-conscious to conscious states and vice versa.(3) Provision of new arguments that explain why highly sophisticated computers or robots have not yet developed consciousness.(4) Discussion based on the concept of consciousness that explains why psychology has not developed in a way that is similar to the sciences (e.g., physics).

Related Topics: Consciousness research

References

  1. Algom, D.
    (1991) Issues in the history of psychology [Heb.]. Tel-Aviv Ministry of Defense Publishing House.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. (2019) A history of psychology. Ra’anana, Israel: Open University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Allen, C. , & Trestman, M.
    (2016) Animal consciousness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/consciousness-animal/
     [Google Scholar]
  4. (2024) Animal consciousness. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/consciousness-animal/
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Atmanspacher, H.
    (2017) Quantum approaches to brain and mind. In S. Schneider & M. Velmans (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to consciousness (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119132363.ch21
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119132363.ch21 [Google Scholar]
  6. (2024) Quantum approaches to consciousness. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/qt-consciousness/
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Avidan, G. , Tanzer, M. , & Behrmann, M.
    (2011) Impaired holistic processing in congenital prosopagnosia. Neuropsychologia, 49 (9), 2541–2552. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  8. Avramides, A.
    (2020) Other minds. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/other-minds/
     [Google Scholar]
  9. (2023) Other minds. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/other-minds/
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Baars, B. J.
    (1988) A cognitive theory of consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (2017) The global workspace theory of consciousness: Predictions and results. In S. Schneider & M. Velmans (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to consciousness (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119132363.ch16
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119132363.ch16 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bargh, J. A. , & Morsella, E.
    (2008) The unconscious mind. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 (1), 73–79. 10.1111/j.1745‑6916.2008.00064.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00064.x [Google Scholar]
  13. Baumeister, R. F.
    (2008) Free will in scientific psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3 (1), 14–19. 10.1111/j.1745‑6916.2008.00057.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00057.x [Google Scholar]
  14. Bayne, T.
    (2023) Where does consciousness start? Debate is heating up over some of the leading theories. Science (alert).
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Bayne, T. , Seth, A. K. , Massimini, M. , Shepherd, J. , Cleeremans, A. , Fleming, S. M. , Malach, R. , Mattingley, J. B. , Menon, D. K. , Owen, A. M. , Peters, M. A. K. , Razi, A. , & Mudrik, L.
    (2024) Tests for consciousness in humans and beyond. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28 (5), 454–466. 10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.01.010 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bechtel, W.
    (2008) Mental mechanisms: Philosophical perspectives on cognitive neuroscience. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Bell, D. E. , Raifa, H. , & Tversky, A.
    (1988) Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions in decision making. In D. E. Bell , H. Raifa , & A. Tversky (Eds.), Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions (pp. xx–xx). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511598951.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598951.003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Berezow, A.
    (2012, July 13) Why psychology isn’t science. The LA Times. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-xpm-2012-jul-13-la-ol-blowback-psychology-science-20120713-story.html
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Birch, J.
    (2024) The edge of sentience: Risk and precaution in Humans, other animals, and AI. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/9780191966729.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/9780191966729.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bird, A.
    (2007) What is scientific progress?Noûs, 41 (1), 64–89. 10.1111/j.1468‑0068.2007.00638.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0068.2007.00638.x [Google Scholar]
  21. Blackbum, S.
    (Ed., 2016) Ship of Theseus. The Oxford dictionary of philosophy (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acref/9780198735304.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780198735304.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  22. Blackmore, S.
    (2013) Consciousness: An introduction (3rd ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783986
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783986 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2018) Are humans the only conscious animal? Decoding the puzzle of human consciousness. Scientific American, 319 , 48–53. 10.1038/scientificamerican0918‑48
     https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0918-48 [Google Scholar]
  24. Blake, R. , Brascamp, J. , & Heeger, D. J.
    (2014) Can binocular rivalry reveal neural correlates of consciousness?Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 369 (1641), 20130211. 10.1098/rstb.2013.0211
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0211 [Google Scholar]
  25. Block, N.
    (1995) How many concepts of consciousness?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18 (2), 272–284. 10.1017/S0140525X00038486
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00038486 [Google Scholar]
  26. (2007) Consciousness, accessibility, and the mesh between psychology and neuroscience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30 (5–6), 481–548. 10.1017/S0140525X07002786
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07002786 [Google Scholar]
  27. Bourget, D.
    (2017) The role of consciousness in grasping and understanding. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 95 (2), 285–318. 10.1111/phpr.12208
     https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12208 [Google Scholar]
  28. Brass, M. , Furstenberg, A. , & Mele, A. R.
    (2019) Why neuroscience does not disprove free will. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 102 , 251–263. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.04.024
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.04.024 [Google Scholar]
  29. Bratman, M.
    (1987) Intention, plans and practical reason. Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Bringmann, L. F. , & Eronen, M. I.
    (2016) Heating up the measurement debate: What psychologists can learn from the history of physics. Theory & Psychology, 26 (1), 27–43. 10.1177/0959354315617253
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354315617253 [Google Scholar]
  31. Brown, R. , Lau, H. , & LeDoux, J. E.
    (2019) Understanding the higher-order approach to consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23 , 754–768. 10.1016/j.tics.2019.06.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.06.009 [Google Scholar]
  32. Burkeman, O.
    (2015, January 21) Why can’t the world’s greatest minds solve the mystery of consciousness?The Guardian.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Busigny, T. , & Rossion, B.
    (2010) Acquired prosopagnosia abolishes the face inversion effect. Cortex, 46 (8), 965–981. 10.1016/j.cortex.2009.07.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2009.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  34. Butlin, P. , Long, R. , Elmoznino, E. , Bengio, Y. , Birch, J. , Constant, A. , Deane, G. , Fleming, S. F. , Xu Ji, C. F. , Kanai, R. , Klein, C. , Lindsay, G. , Michel, M. , Liad Mudrik, L. , Peters, M. A. K. , Schwitzgebel, E. , Simon, J. , & VanRullen, R.
    (2023) Consciousness in artificial intelligence: Insights from the science of consciousness. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2308.08708
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Buttazzo, G.
    (2001) Artificial consciousness: Utopia or real possibility?Computer, 34 (7), 24–30. https://philpapers.org/rec/BUTACU. 10.1109/2.933500
     https://doi.org/10.1109/2.933500 [Google Scholar]
  36. Byrne, A.
    (1997) Some like it HOT: Consciousness and higher-order thoughts. Philosophical Studies, 86 (2), 103–129. 10.1023/A:1017959107565
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017959107565 [Google Scholar]
  37. Campbell, N. R.
    (1957) Foundations of Science. Dover.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Carroll, S. M.
    (2016) The big picture: On the origins of life, meaning, and the universe itself. Oneworld Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Carruthers, P.
    (2004) HOP over FOR, HOT theory. In Gennaro, R. J. (Ed.) Higher-order theories of consciousness: An anthology (pp. 115–135). John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.56.08car
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.56.08car [Google Scholar]
  40. (2017) Higher-order theories of consciousness. In S. Schneider & M. Velmans (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to consciousness (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781119132363.ch20
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119132363.ch20 [Google Scholar]
  41. Carruthers, P. , & Gennaro, R.
    (2020) Higher-order theories of consciousness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/consciousness-higher/
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Cea, I. , Negro, N. , & Signorelli, C. M.
    (2024) Only consciousness truly exists? Two problems for IIT 4.0’s ontology. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1485433. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1485433
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1485433 [Google Scholar]
  43. Chakravartty, A.
    (2017) Scientific realism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2017 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/scientific-realism/
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Chalmers, D.
    (1996) The conscious mind: In search of a fundamental theory. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Chalmers, D. J.
    (1997) Facing up to the problem of consciousness. In J. Shear (Ed.), Explaining consciousness: The hard problem (pp. 9–32). MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Chang, H.
    (2004) Inventing temperature: Measurement and scientific progress. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0195171276.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/0195171276.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  47. Chella, A. , Cangelosi, A. , Metta, G. , & Bringsjord, S.
    (2019) Editorial: Consciousness in humanoid robots. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 6 , Article 17. 10.3389/frobt.2019.00017
     https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2019.00017 [Google Scholar]
  48. Chella, A. , & Manzotti, R.
    (2011) Artificial consciousness. In V. Cutsuridis (Eds.), Perception-action cycle: Models, architectures, and hardware. Springer Science + Business Media. 10.1007/978‑1‑4419‑1452‑1_20
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1452-1_20 [Google Scholar]
  49. Chrisley, R.
    (2008) Philosophical foundations of artificial consciousness. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 44 (2), 119–137. 10.1016/j.artmed.2008.07.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2008.07.011 [Google Scholar]
  50. Churchland, P. M.
    (1988) Matter and consciousness (Rev. ed). MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Civile, C. , McLaren, R. P. , & McLaren, I. P. L.
    (2014) The face inversion effect — parts and wholes: Individual features and their configuration. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67 (4), 728–746. 10.1080/17470218.2013.828315
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.828315 [Google Scholar]
  52. (2016) The face inversion effect: Roles of first — and second-order configural information. American Journal of Psychology, 129 (1), 23–35. 10.5406/amerjpsyc.129.1.0023
     https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.129.1.0023 [Google Scholar]
  53. Cleeremans, A. , & Tallon-Baudry, C.
    (2022) Consciousness matters: Phenomenal experience has functional value. Neuroscience of Consciousness, 1 , 1–11. 10.1093/nc/niac007
     https://doi.org/10.1093/nc/niac007 [Google Scholar]
  54. Cliff, N.
    (1992) Abstract measurement theory and the revolution that never happened. Psychological Science, 3 (3), 186–190. 10.1111/j.1467‑9280.1992.tb00024.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00024.x [Google Scholar]
  55. Cole, D.
    (2023) The Chinese Room argument. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2023/entries/chinese-room/
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Coombs, C. H. , Dawes, R. M. , & Tversky, A.
    (1970) Mathematical psychology: An elementary introduction. Prentice-Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Cooper, R. , & Shallice, T.
    (1995) SOAR and the case for unified theories of cognition. Cognition, 55 (2), 115–149. 10.1016/0010‑0277(94)00644‑Z
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)00644-Z [Google Scholar]
  58. Cosmelli, D. , Lachaux, J.-P. , & Thompson, E.
    (2007) Neurodynamical approaches to consciousness. In P. Zelazo , M. Moscovich , & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 731–774). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816789.027
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816789.027 [Google Scholar]
  59. Crane, T.
    (1999) The autonomy of psychology. In Wilson, R. A. and Keil, F. (Eds.), MIT encyclopedia of cognitive sciences. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Crevier, D.
    (1993) AI: The tumultuous history of the search for artificial intelligence. Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Davies, M.
    (2008) Consciousness and explanation. In L. Weiskrantz & M. Davies (Eds.), Frontiers of consciousness: Chichele Lectures. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233151.003.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199233151.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Dawkins, M. S.
    (1987) Minding and mattering. In C. Blakemore and S. Greenfield (Eds.), Mindwaves (pp. 151–160). Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. (1995) Unravelling animal behavior (2nd ed.). Longman Scientific & Technical.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. de Regt, H. W. , Leonelli, S. , & Eigner, K.
    (Eds.) (2009) Scientific understanding: Philosophical perspectives. University of Pittsburgh Press. 10.2307/j.ctt9qh59s
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt9qh59s [Google Scholar]
  65. Dehaene, S.
    (2014) Consciousness and the brain: Deciphering how the brain codes our thoughts. Viking Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Dehaene, S. , Lau, H. , & Kouider, S.
    (2021) What is consciousness, and could machines have it?In J. von Braun (Eds.), Robotics, AI, and humanity: Science, ethics, and policy (pp. 43–56). Springer Open Access. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑54173‑6_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54173-6_4 [Google Scholar]
  67. Dehaene, S. & Naccache, L.
    (2001) Towards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: Basic evidence and a workspace framework. Cognition, 79 (1–2), 1–37. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(00)00123‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00123-2 [Google Scholar]
  68. Dennett, D.
    (1991) Consciousness Explained. Little, Brown and Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Dennett, D. C.
    (1995) The unimagined preposterousness of zombies. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2 (4), 322–326.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Derakhshani, M. , Diósi, L. , Laubenstein, M. , Piscicchia, K. , & Curceanu, C.
    (2022) At the crossroad of the search for spontaneous radiation and the Orch OR consciousness theory. Physics of Life Reviews, 42 , 8–14. 10.1016/j.plrev.2022.05.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2022.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  71. Diamond, R. , & Carey, S.
    (1986) Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115 (2), 107–117. 10.1037/0096‑3445.115.2.107
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.115.2.107 [Google Scholar]
  72. Dietrich, E. , & Hardcastle, V. G.
    (2005) Sisyphus’s boulder: Consciousness and the limits of the knowable. John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.60
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.60 [Google Scholar]
  73. Dijksterhuis, A. , & Aarts, H.
    (2010) Goals, attention, and (un)consciousness. Annual Review of Psychology, 61 , 467–490. 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100445
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100445 [Google Scholar]
  74. Doerig, A. , Schurger, A. , Herss, K. , & Herzog, M.
    (2019) The unfolding argument: Why IIT and other causal structure theories cannot explain consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition, 72 , 49–59. 10.1016/j.concog.2019.04.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2019.04.002 [Google Scholar]
  75. Doerig, A. , Schuster, A. , & Herzog, M. H.
    (2021) Hard criteria for empirical theories of consciousness. Cognitive Neuroscience, 12 , 41–62. 10.1080/17588928.2020.1772214
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17588928.2020.1772214 [Google Scholar]
  76. Dreyfus, H.
    (1972) What computers can’t do: A critique of artificial reason. Harper & Row.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Elsey, J. , & Moss, D.
    (2023, May12). Public opinion of AI policy and risk. Rethink Priorities. empathize? Yes. Scientific American Presents: Exploring Intelligence, 9 , 66–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Eronen, M. I. , & Bringmann, L. F.
    (2021) The theory crisis in psychology: How to move forward. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16 (4), 779–788. 10.1177/1745691620970586
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620970586 [Google Scholar]
  79. Estes, W. K.
    (1950) Toward a statistical theory of learning. Psychological Review, 57 (2), 94–107. 10.1037/h0058559
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0058559 [Google Scholar]
  80. Fabbro, F. , Cantone, D. , Feruglio, S. , & Cresccentini, C.
    (2019) Origin and evolution of human consciousness. In M. A. Hofman (Ed.), Progress in brain research. Vol.250 (pp. 317–343). Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Fallon, F.
    (2019) Integrated information theory of consciousness. The Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. iep.utm.edu 2023
     [Google Scholar]
  82. (2020) Integrated information theory of consciousness. The internet encyclopedia of philosophy. iep.utm.edu
     [Google Scholar]
  83. (2024) Integrated information theory of consciousness. The internet encyclopedia of philosophy.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Fallshore, M. , & Bartholow, J.
    (2003) Recognition of emotion from inverted schematic drawings of faces. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96 (1), 236–244. 10.2466/pms.2003.96.1.236
     https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.2003.96.1.236 [Google Scholar]
  85. Farrell, B. A.
    (1950) Experience. Mind, 59 (234), 170–198. 10.1093/mind/LIX.234.170
     https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/LIX.234.170 [Google Scholar]
  86. Faverio, M. , & Tyson, A.
    (2023, November21). What the data says about Americans’ views of artificial intelligence. Short reads, Pew Research Center.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. Feinberg, T. E. , & Mallatt, J.
    (2016) The ancient origins of consciousness: How the brain created experience. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/10714.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10714.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  88. Ferguson, C. J.
    (2015) Everybody knows psychology is not a real science. American Psychologist, 70 (6), 527–542. 10.1037/a0039405
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039405 [Google Scholar]
  89. Flanagan, O.
    (1992) Consciousness reconsidered. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/2112.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2112.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  90. Fleming, S. M. , Frith, C. , Goodale, M. , Lau, H. , LeDoux, J. E. , & Lee, A. L. F.
    (2023) The integrated information theory of consciousness as pseudoscience. PsyArXiv (Preprint). 10.31234/osf.io/zsr78
     https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/zsr78 [Google Scholar]
  91. Fodor, J. A.
    (1974) Special sciences, or the disunity of science as a working hypothesis. Synthese, 28 (2), 97–115. 10.1007/BF00485230
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00485230 [Google Scholar]
  92. (1998) Special sciences: Still autonomous after all these years. In J. Fodor (Ed.), In critical condition: Polemical essays on cognitive science and philosophy of mind (pp. 9–24). MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/3696.003.0004
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3696.003.0004 [Google Scholar]
  93. Frackowiak, R. S. J.
    , (2004) Human brain function (2nd ed.). Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Franz, D. J.
    (2022) “Are psychological attributes quantitative?” is not an empirical question: Conceptual confusions in the measurement debate. Theory & Psychology, 32 (1), 131–150. 10.1177/09593543211045340
     https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543211045340 [Google Scholar]
  95. Friedenberg, J. , & Silverman, G.
    (2016) Cognitive science: An introduction to the study of mind (3rd ed.). Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Fu, G. , Dong, Y. , Quinn, P. C. , Xiao, W. S. , Wang, Q. , Chen, G. , Pascalis, O. , & Lee, K.
    (2015) Effects of visual expertise on a novel eye-size illusion: Implications for holistic face processing. Vision Research, 113 (Pt A), 104–110. 10.1016/j.visres.2015.05.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2015.05.011 [Google Scholar]
  97. Funder, D. C.
    (2009) Naive and obvious questions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4 (4), 340–344. 10.1111/j.1745‑6924.2009.01135.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01135.x [Google Scholar]
  98. Gajewski, P. D. , Schlegel, K. , & Stoerig, P.
    (2008) Effects of human race and face inversion on the N170: A cross-race study. Journal of Psychophysiology, 22 (3), 157–165. 10.1027/0269‑8803.22.4.157
     https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803.22.4.157 [Google Scholar]
  99. Gallup, G. G., Jr.
    (1970) Chimpanzees: Self recognition. Science, 167 (3914), 86–87. 10.1126/science.167.3914.86
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.167.3914.86 [Google Scholar]
  100. Gallup, G., Jr.
    (1998) Animal self-awareness: A debate — can animals empathize? Yes. Scientific American Presents: Exploring Intelligence, 9 , 66–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Gallup, G. G., Jr. , & Anderson, J. R.
    (2020) Self-recognition in animals: Where do we stand 50 years later? Lessons from Cleaner Wrasse and other species. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 7 (1), 46–58. 10.1037/cns0000206
     https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000206 [Google Scholar]
  102. Gamez, D.
    (2014) The measurement of consciousness: a framework for the scientific study of consciousness. Frontiers in Psychology, 5 , Article 714. 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00714
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00714 [Google Scholar]
  103. Garcia-Marques, L. , & Ferreira, M. B.
    (2011) Friends and foes of theory construction in psychological science: Vague dichotomies, unified theories of cognition, and the new experimentalism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6 (2), 192–201. 10.1177/1745691611400239
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611400239 [Google Scholar]
  104. Gauthier, I. , & Bukach, C.
    (2007) Should we reject the expertise hypothesis?Cognition, 103 (3), 322–330. 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.05.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  105. Gazzaniga, M. S.
    (1967) The split brain in man. Scientific American, 217 (2), 24–29. 10.1038/scientificamerican0867‑24
     https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0867-24 [Google Scholar]
  106. Gennaro, R. J.
    (2004) Higher-order theories of consciousness: An overview. In R. J. Gennaro (Ed.), Higher-order theories of consciousness: An anthology (pp. 1–13). John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.56.02gen
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.56.02gen [Google Scholar]
  107. Gennaro, R. T.
    (2012) The consciousness paradox: Consciousness, concepts, and higher-order thoughts. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  108. (2017) Consciousness. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  109. (2023a) Consciousness. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/
     [Google Scholar]
  110. (2023b) Higher-order theories of consciousness. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Gilaie-Dotan, S. , Gelbard-Sagiv, H. , & Malach, R.
    (2010) Perceptual shape sensitivity to upright and inverted faces is reflected in neuronal adaptation. NeuroImage, 50 (1), 383–395. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.077
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.077 [Google Scholar]
  112. Glymore, C. N.
    (1980) Theory and evidence. Princeton University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Godfrey-Smith, P.
    (2008) Recurrent transient underdetermination and the glass half full. Philosophical Studies, 137 (1), 141–148. 10.1007/s11098‑007‑9172‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-007-9172-2 [Google Scholar]
  114. (2016) Other minds: The octopus, the sea, and the deep origins of consciousness. William Collins.
     [Google Scholar]
  115. Goff, P. , Seager, W. , & Allen-Hermanson, S.
    (2022) Panpsychism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2022/entries/panpsychism/
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Goldstein, S.
    (2025) Your mind is not a machine: Why human minds evolved to survive, not to compute. Psychology Today, Posted July 5. Hare, T. A. , Camerer, C. F. , & Rangel, A. (2009) Self-control in decision-making involves modulation of the vmPFC valuation system. Science , 324 (5927), 646–648.
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Goldstien, A. , & Hassin, R.
    (2017) Commentary: definitely maybe: can unconscious processes perform the same functions as conscious processes?Frontiers in Psychology, 8 , 1230. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01230
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01230 [Google Scholar]
  118. Gordon, E. C.
    (2020) Understanding in epistemology. In M. A. Peters (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational philosophy and theory. 10.1007/978‑981‑287‑532‑7_698‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-532-7_698-1 [Google Scholar]
  119. Grimm, S. R.
    (2011) Understanding. In S. Bernecker and D. Pritchard (Eds.), Routledge companion to epistemology (pp. 84–94). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203839065.ch9
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839065.ch9 [Google Scholar]
  120. (2016) How understanding people differs from understanding the natural world. Philosophical Issues, 26 (1), 209–225. 10.1111/phis.12068
     https://doi.org/10.1111/phis.12068 [Google Scholar]
  121. (2019) Understanding as an intellectual virtue. In H. Battaly (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of virtue epistemology (pp. 340–351). Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. Grush, R. , & Churchland, P. S.
    (1995) Gaps in Penrose’s toilings. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2 (1), 10–29.
     [Google Scholar]
  123. Haig, B. D.
    (2014) Investigating the psychological world: Scientific method in the behavioral sciences. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027366.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262027366.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  124. Hameroff, S. R. , & Penrose, R.
    (1996) Conscious events as orchestrated spacetime selections. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 3 (1), 36–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  125. (2014) Consciousness in the universe: A review of the “Orch OR” theory. Physics of Life Reviews, 11 (1), 39–78. 10.1016/j.plrev.2013.08.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2013.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  126. Harnad, S.
    (1990) The symbol grounding problem. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 42 , 335–346. 10.1016/0167‑2789(90)90087‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(90)90087-6 [Google Scholar]
  127. (2003) Can a machine be conscious? How?Journal of Consciousness, 10 (4–5), 67–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  128. Hassin, R.
    (2013) Yes it can: On the functional abilities of the human unconscious. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8 (2), 195–207. 10.1177/1745691612460684
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460684 [Google Scholar]
  129. Hatfield, G.
    (2018) René Descartes. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/descartes
     [Google Scholar]
  130. Heene, M.
    (2013) Additive conjoint measurement and the resistance toward falsifiability in psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 4 , Article 246. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00246
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00246 [Google Scholar]
  131. Heil, J.
    (2003) Mental causation. In S. P. Stich & T. A. Warfield (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to philosophy of mind (pp. 214–234). Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470998762.ch9
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470998762.ch9 [Google Scholar]
  132. Hempel, C. G.
    (1965) Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. Free Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  133. (1966) Philosophy of natural science. Prentice-Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  134. Hempel, C. G. , & Oppenheim, P.
    (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philosophy of Science, 15 (2), 135–175. 10.1086/286983
     https://doi.org/10.1086/286983 [Google Scholar]
  135. Henriques, G.
    (2016, January27). The “Is psychology a science?” debate. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/theory-knowledge/201601/the-is-psychology-science-debate
     [Google Scholar]
  136. Herzig, A. , Lorini, E. , Perrussel, L. , & Xiao, Z.
    (2017) BDI logics for BDI architectures: Old problems, new perspectives. Künstliche Intelligenz, 31 (1), 73–83. 10.1007/s13218‑016‑0457‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-016-0457-5 [Google Scholar]
  137. Hesselmann, G. , & Moors, P.
    (2015) Definitely maybe: can unconscious processes perform the same functions as conscious processes?Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , 584. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00584
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00584 [Google Scholar]
  138. Hilgard, E. R. , & Bower, G. H.
    (1966) Theories of learning (3rd ed.). Appleton-Century-Crofts.
     [Google Scholar]
  139. Hobson, J. A.
    (2005) Sleep is of the brain, by the brain and for the brain. Nature, 437 (7063), 1254–1256. 10.1038/nature04283
     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04283 [Google Scholar]
  140. Horgan, T. , & Woodward, J.
    (1985) Folk psychology is here to stay. Philosophy Review, 94 (2), 197–226. 10.2307/2185428
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2185428 [Google Scholar]
  141. Horne, J.
    (2022) A framework for studying consciousness. CONSCIOUSNESS: Ideas and Research for the Twenty-First Century, 9 (1), Article 1.
     [Google Scholar]
  142. Horne, Z. , Muradoglu, M. , & Cimpian, A.
    (2019) Explanation as a cognitive process. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23 (2), 187–199. 10.1016/j.tics.2018.12.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  143. Hunt, T. , Ericson, M. , & Schooler, J.
    (2022) Where’s my consciousness-ometer? How to test for the presence and complexity of consciousness. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17 (4), 1150–1165. 10.1177/17456916211029942
     https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211029942 [Google Scholar]
  144. Hutto, D. , & Ravenscroft, I.
    (2021) Folk psychology as a theory. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/folkpsych-theory/
     [Google Scholar]
  145. Irribarra, D. T.
    (2021) A pragmatic perspective of measurement. Springer Briefs in Psychology. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑74025‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74025-2 [Google Scholar]
  146. Irvine, E.
    (2013a) Measures of consciousness. Philosophy Compass, 8 (3), 285–297. 10.1111/phc3.12016
     https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12016 [Google Scholar]
  147. (2013b) Consciousness as a scientific concept: A philosophy of science perspective. Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑5173‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5173-6 [Google Scholar]
  148. Jackson, F.
    (1982) Epiphenomenal qualia. Philosophical Quarterly, 32 (127), 127–136. 10.2307/2960077
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2960077 [Google Scholar]
  149. Jacob, P.
    (2023) Intentionality. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2023/entries/intentionality/
     [Google Scholar]
  150. Jaynes, J.
    (1990) The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind. Houghton Mifflin.
     [Google Scholar]
  151. Jogalekar, A.
    (2013, August13). Is psychology a “real” science? Does it really matter?Scientific American Blog Network. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/the-curious-wavefunction/is-psychology-a-real-science-does-it-really-matter/
     [Google Scholar]
  152. Joiner, W. J.
    (2016) Unravelling the evolutionary determinants of sleep. Current Biology, 26 (20), R1073–R1087. 10.1016/j.cub.2016.08.068
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.08.068 [Google Scholar]
  153. Jones, M. W. , & Hunt, T.
    (2023) Electromagnetic-field theories of qualia: Can they improve upon standard neuroscience?Frontiers in Psychology, 14. 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1015967
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1015967 [Google Scholar]
  154. Kahneman, D.
    (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
     [Google Scholar]
  155. Kaplan, D. M. , & Craver, C. F.
    (2011) The explanatory force of dynamical and mathematical models in neuroscience: A mechanistic perspective. Philosophy of Science, 78 (4), 601–627. 10.1086/661755
     https://doi.org/10.1086/661755 [Google Scholar]
  156. Kays, J. L. , Hurley, R. A. , & Taber, K. H.
    (2012) The dynamic brain: Neuroplasticity and mental health. Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 24 (2), 118–124. 10.1176/appi.neuropsych.12050109
     https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.12050109 [Google Scholar]
  157. Keas, M. N.
    (2018) Systematizing the theoretical virtues. Synthese, 195 , 2761–2793. 10.1007/s11229‑017‑1355‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1355-6 [Google Scholar]
  158. Keijzer, F.
    (2001) Representation and behavior. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/5889.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5889.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  159. Khalifa, K.
    (2013) The role of explanation in understanding. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 64 (1), 161–187. 10.1093/bjps/axr057
     https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axr057 [Google Scholar]
  160. (2017) Understanding, explanation, and scientific knowledge. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108164276
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108164276 [Google Scholar]
  161. Kim, C.-Y. , & Blake, R.
    (2005) Psychophysical magic: Rendering the visible “invisible.”Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9 (8), 381–388. 10.1016/j.tics.2005.06.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.06.012 [Google Scholar]
  162. Kim, J.
    (1996) Philosophy of mind. Boulder. Westview Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  163. (1998) Mind in a physical world: An essay on the mind–body problem and mental causation. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/4629.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4629.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  164. (2002) Précis of mind in a physical world. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 65 (3), 640–643. 10.1111/j.1933‑1592.2002.tb00226.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1933-1592.2002.tb00226.x [Google Scholar]
  165. (2011) Philosophy of mind (3rd ed.). Westview Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  166. Kirk, R.
    (2023) Zombies. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2023/entries/zombies/
     [Google Scholar]
  167. Kirkeby-Hinrup, A. , Stephens, A. , Balogh Sjostrand, A. , & Overgaard, M.
    (2025) Methodological issues in conscious research: Theory comparison, the role of empirical evidence, and a replication crisis. Frontiers in Psychology, 16 , 1633907. 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1633907
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1633907 [Google Scholar]
  168. Kleiner, J.
    (2020) Brain states matter. A reply to the unfolding argument. Consciousness and Cognition, 85 , 102981. 10.1016/j.concog.2020.102981
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2020.102981 [Google Scholar]
  169. Koch, C.
    (2014, January1). Is consciousness universal?Scientific American.
     [Google Scholar]
  170. (2018) What is consciousness?Nature, 557 (7704), 8–12. 10.1038/d41586‑018‑05097‑x
     https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-05097-x [Google Scholar]
  171. (2019) The feeling of life itself: Why consciousness is widespread but can’t be computed. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/11705.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11705.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  172. Kosslyn, S. M.
    (1975) Information representation in visual image. Cognitive Psychology, 7 (3), 341–370. 10.1016/0010‑0285(75)90015‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90015-8 [Google Scholar]
  173. Krantz, D. H. , & Wallsten, T. S.
    (2019) Comment on Trendler’s (2019) “Conjoint measurement undone.” Theory & Psychology, 29 , 129–137. 10.1177/0959354318815767
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318815767 [Google Scholar]
  174. Kriegel, U.
    (2023) Self-consciousness. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/
     [Google Scholar]
  175. Kuhn, T. S.
    (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  176. Kurzweil, R.
    (1999) The age of spiritual machines. Texere.
     [Google Scholar]
  177. Lacalli, T.
    (2024) The function(s) of consciousness: an evolutionary perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 15 , 1493423. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1493423
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1493423 [Google Scholar]
  178. Lau, H. , & Rosenthal, D.
    (2011) Empirical support for higher-order theories of conscious awareness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15 (8), 365–373. 10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  179. Laudan, L. , & Leplin, J.
    (1991) Empirical equivalence and underdetermination. Journal of Philosophy, 88 (9), 449–472. 10.2307/2026601
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2026601 [Google Scholar]
  180. Leahey, T. H.
    (2004) A history of psychology (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice-Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  181. Lenhard, J.
    (2006) Models and statistical inference: The controversy between Fisher and Neyman–Pearson. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 57 (1), 69–91. 10.1093/bjps/axi152
     https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axi152 [Google Scholar]
  182. Lenharo, M.
    (2023) Consciousness theory slammed as “pseudoscience” — sparking uproar. Nature (news). 10.1038/d41586‑023‑02971‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02971-1 [Google Scholar]
  183. Levine, J.
    (1983) Materialism and qualia: The explanatory gap. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64 , 354–361. 10.1111/j.1468‑0114.1983.tb00207.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00207.x [Google Scholar]
  184. (2007) Anti-materialist arguments and influential replies. In M. Velmans & S. Schneider (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to consciousness (pp. 371–380). Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470751466.ch30
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470751466.ch30 [Google Scholar]
  185. Lewis, R. L.
    (2001) Cognitive theory, SOAR. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltez (Eds.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 2178–2183). Pergamon. 10.1016/B0‑08‑043076‑7/01583‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/01583-7 [Google Scholar]
  186. Libet, B.
    (1982) Brain stimulation in the study of neuronal functions for conscious sensory experiments. Human Neurobiology, 1 (4), 235–242.
     [Google Scholar]
  187. (1985) Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8 (4), 529–566. 10.1017/S0140525X00044903
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00044903 [Google Scholar]
  188. Lilienfeld, S. O.
    (2010) Can psychology become a science?Personality and Individual Differences, 49 (4), 281–288. 10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.024
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.024 [Google Scholar]
  189. (2012) Public skepticism of psychology: Why many people perceive the study of human behavior as unscientific. American Psychologist, 67 (2), 111–129. 10.1037/a0023963
     https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023963 [Google Scholar]
  190. Lipton, P.
    (1991) Inference to the best explanation. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203470855_chapter_4
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203470855_chapter_4 [Google Scholar]
  191. Lipton, P.
    (1992) The seductive-nomological model. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 23 , 691–698. 10.1016/0039‑3681(92)90020‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-3681(92)90020-7 [Google Scholar]
  192. (2001) What good is an explanation?In G. Hon & S. S. Rakover (Eds.), Explanation: Theoretical approaches and applications. Kluwer Academic. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑9731‑9_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9731-9_2 [Google Scholar]
  193. (2005) Inference to the best explanation (2nd ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  194. (2009) Understanding without explanation. In H. W. de Regt , S. Leonelli , & K. Eigner (Eds.), Scientific understanding: Philosophical perspectives (pp. 43–63). University of Pittsburgh Press. 10.2307/j.ctt9qh59s.6
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt9qh59s.6 [Google Scholar]
  195. Loginov, E. V.
    (2024) Illusion, Moore, and Chalmers. Frontiers in Psychology, 15 , 1449314. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1449314
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1449314 [Google Scholar]
  196. Low, P.
    (2012) The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness. Proceedings of the Francis Crick Memorial Conference, Churchill College, Cambridge University (pp. 1–2).
     [Google Scholar]
  197. Lucas, J. R.
    (1961) Minds, machines, and Gӧdel. Philosophy, 36 (137), 112–127. 10.1017/S0031819100057983
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100057983 [Google Scholar]
  198. Luce, R. D.
    (1972) What sort of measurement is psychophysical measurement?American Psychologist, 27 (2), 96–106. 10.1037/h0032677
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032677 [Google Scholar]
  199. Luce, R. D. , & Tukey, J. W.
    (1964) Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1 (1), 1–27. 10.1016/0022‑2496(64)90015‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(64)90015-X [Google Scholar]
  200. Ludwig, K.
    (2003) The mind–body problem: An overview. In S. P. Stich & T. A. Warfield (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to philosophy of mind (pp. 1–46). Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470998762.ch1
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470998762.ch1 [Google Scholar]
  201. Lycan, W. G.
    (2004) The superiority of HOP to HOT. In R. J. Gennaro (Ed.), Higher-order theories of consciousness: An anthology (pp. 93–113). John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.56.07lyc
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.56.07lyc [Google Scholar]
  202. Malle, B. F.
    (2009) Folk theories of consciousness. In W. P. Banks (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Consciousness (pp. 251–263). Elsevier/Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑012373873‑8.00023‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012373873-8.00023-2 [Google Scholar]
  203. Marks, L. E. , & Algom, D.
    (1998) Psychophysical scaling. In M. H. Birnbaum (Ed.), Measurement, judgment, and decision-making (pp. 81–178). Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑012099975‑0.50004‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012099975-0.50004-X [Google Scholar]
  204. Marr, D.
    (1982) Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. W. H. Freeman.
     [Google Scholar]
  205. Marx, M. H. , & Cronan-Hillix, W. A.
    (1987) Systems and theories in psychology (4th ed.). McGraw–Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  206. Mashour, G. A. , Roelfsema, P. , Changeux, J.-P. , & Dehaene, S.
    (2020) Conscious processing and the global neuronal workspace hypothesis. Neuron, 105 , 776–798. 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.01.026
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.01.026 [Google Scholar]
  207. Maurer, D. , Le Grand, R. , & Mondloch, C. J.
    (2002) The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6 (6), 255–260. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(02)01903‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01903-4 [Google Scholar]
  208. Mayrhofer, R. , Büchner, I. C. , & Hevesi, J.
    (2024) The quantitative paradigm and the nature of the human mind: The replication crisis as an epistemological crisis of quantitative psychology in view of the ontic nature of the psyche. Frontiers in Psychology, 15 , Article 1390233. 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1390233
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1390233 [Google Scholar]
  209. McCorduck, P.
    (1979) Machines who think. W. H. Freeman.
     [Google Scholar]
  210. McDermott, D.
    (2007) Artificial intelligence and consciousness. In P. D. Zelazlo , M. Moscovitch , & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 117–150). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816789.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816789.007 [Google Scholar]
  211. McGinn, C.
    (1989) Can we solve the mind–body problem?Mind, 98 (391), 349–366. 10.1093/mind/XCVIII.391.349
     https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/XCVIII.391.349 [Google Scholar]
  212. McKelvie, S.
    (1995) Emotional expression in upside-down faces: Evidence for configurational and componential processing. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34 (3), 325–334. 10.1111/j.2044‑8309.1995.tb01067.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01067.x [Google Scholar]
  213. Mckilliam, A.
    (2025) Explanation, understanding, and the methodological problem in consciousness science. Synthese, 205 (4), 142. 10.1007/s11229‑025‑05001‑x
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-025-05001-x [Google Scholar]
  214. McKilliam, A.
    (in press). Do mechanisms matter for inferences about consciousness?Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 10.1080/00048402.2025.2587709
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00048402.2025.2587709 [Google Scholar]
  215. McKone, E.
    (2010) Face and object recognition: How do they differ?In V. Coltheart (Ed.), Tutorials in visual cognition (pp. 261–303). Psychology Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  216. McKone, E. , & Yovel, G.
    (2009) Why does picture-plane inversion sometimes dissociate perception of features and spacing in faces, and sometimes not? Toward a new theory of holistic processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16 (5), 778–797. 10.3758/PBR.16.5.778
     https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.5.778 [Google Scholar]
  217. Megill, J.
    (2024) The Lucas–Penrose argument about Gӧdel’s theorem. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/lp-argue/
     [Google Scholar]
  218. Merker, B.
    (2007) Consciousness without a cerebral cortex: A challenge for neuroscience and medicine. Brain and Behavioral Sciences, 30 (1), 63–81. 10.1017/S0140525X07000891
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07000891 [Google Scholar]
  219. Michel, M.
    (2023) Confidence in consciousness research. WIREs Cognitive Science, 14:e1628. 10.1002/wcs.1628
     https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1628 [Google Scholar]
  220. Michell, J.
    (1999) Measurement in psychology: Critical history of a methodological concept. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511490040
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490040 [Google Scholar]
  221. Milkowski, M.
    (2024) The computational theory of mind. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/computational-theory-of-mind/
     [Google Scholar]
  222. Miller, S. M.
    (2015) The correlation/constitution distinction problem: Foundations, limits and explanation in consciousness science. In S. M. Miller (Ed.), The constitution of phenomenal consciousness. Toward a science and theory. Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.92.05mil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.92.05mil [Google Scholar]
  223. Millgram, E.
    (2001) Practical reasoning: The current state of play. In E. Millgram (Ed.), Varieties of practical reasoning. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  224. Morsella, E.
    (2005) The function of phenomenal states: Supramodular interaction theory. Psychological Review, 112 (4), 1000–1021. 10.1037/0033‑295X.112.4.1000
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.1000 [Google Scholar]
  225. Müller, V. C.
    (2024) Philosophy of AI: Structured overview. In N. Smuha (Ed.), Cambridge handbook on the law, ethics and policy of artificial intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  226. Murphy, J. , & Cook, R.
    (2017) Revealing the mechanisms of human face perception using dynamic apertures. Cognition, 169 , 25–35. 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.08.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  227. Nagel, E.
    (1961) The structure of science: Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. Harcourt-Brace & World.
     [Google Scholar]
  228. Nagel, T.
    (1974) What is it like to be a bat?Philosophical Review, 83 (4), 435–450. 10.2307/2183914
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2183914 [Google Scholar]
  229. Neal, J. M. , & Liebert, R. M.
    (1986) Science and behavior: An introduction to methods of research (3rd ed.). Prentice-Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  230. New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness
    New York Declaration on Animal Consciousness (2024, April19). New York University, NY.
  231. Newell, A.
    (1973) You can’t play 20 questions with nature and win. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 283–308). Academic Press. 10.1016/B978‑0‑12‑170150‑5.50012‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-170150-5.50012-3 [Google Scholar]
  232. (1982) The knowledge level. AI Magazine, 2 , 1–33.
     [Google Scholar]
  233. (1992) SOAR as a unified theory of cognition: Issues and explanations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 15 (3), 464–492. 10.1017/S0140525X00069740
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00069740 [Google Scholar]
  234. Ng, Y.-K.
    (2023) Could artificial intelligence have consciousness? Some perspectives from neurology and parapsychology. AI & Society, 38 , 425–436. 10.1007/s00146‑021‑01305‑x
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01305-x [Google Scholar]
  235. Nieder, A.
    (2021) Consciousness without cortex. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 71 , 69–76. 10.1016/j.conb.2021.09.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2021.09.010 [Google Scholar]
  236. Niiniluoto, I.
    (2019) Scientific progress. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2019 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/scientific-progress/
     [Google Scholar]
  237. Nilsen, A. S. , Juel, B. E. , Thurer, B. , Aamondt, A. and Storm, J.
    (2022) Are we really unconscious in “unconscious” states? Common assumptions revisited. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 16 , 987051. 10.3389/fnhum.2022.987051
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2022.987051 [Google Scholar]
  238. Nir, Y. , Massimini, M. , Boly, M. , & Tononi, G.
    (2013) Sleep and consciousness. In A. E. Cavanna , A. Nani , H. Blumenfeld , & S. Laureys (Eds.), Neuroimaging of consciousness (pp. 3–21). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑37580‑4_9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37580-4_9 [Google Scholar]
  239. Nisbett, R. E. , & Wilson, T. D.
    (1977) Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84 (3), 231–254. 10.1037/0033‑295X.84.3.231
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.3.231 [Google Scholar]
  240. Nola, R. , & Sankey, H.
    (2007) Theories of scientific method: An introduction. Acumen. 10.1017/UPO9781844653881
     https://doi.org/10.1017/UPO9781844653881 [Google Scholar]
  241. O’Connor, T.
    (2021) Emergent properties. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2021/entries/properties-emergent/
     [Google Scholar]
  242. Pae, H.
    (2025) Reflective analysis on empirical theories in consciousness. Frontiers in Psychology, 16:1571098. 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1571098
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1571098 [Google Scholar]
  243. Pallett, P. M. , & Meng, M.
    (2015) Inversion effects reveal dissociations in facial expression of emotion, gender, and object processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , Article 1029. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01029
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01029 [Google Scholar]
  244. Palmer, S. E.
    (1999) Vision science: Photons to phenomenology. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  245. Parker, D.
    (2019) Psychoneural reduction: a perspective from neural circuits. Biology & Philosophy, 34 (4), 43–44. 10.1007/s10539‑019‑9697‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-019-9697-8 [Google Scholar]
  246. Pashler, H. , & Wagenmakers, E.-J.
    (2012) Editors’ introduction to the special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7 (6), 528–530. 10.1177/1745691612465253
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612465253 [Google Scholar]
  247. Penrose, R.
    (1989) The emperor’s new mind. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198519737.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198519737.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  248. (1994) Shadows of the mind. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  249. Penrose, R. , & Hameroff, S.
    (1995) What “gaps”? Reply to Grush and Churchland. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2 (1), 98–111.
     [Google Scholar]
  250. Persuh, M.
    (2018) Measuring perceptual consciousness. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 , Article 2320. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02320
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02320 [Google Scholar]
  251. Persuh, M. , LaRock, E. , & Berger, J.
    (2018) Working memory and consciousness: The current state of play. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 12 , 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00078
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00078 [Google Scholar]
  252. Phillips, I.
    (2018) The methodological puzzle of phenomenal consciousness. Philosophical Transactions B, 373 (1755), 20170347. 10.1098/rstb.2017.0347
     https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0347 [Google Scholar]
  253. Piccinini, G.
    (2020) Neurocognitive mechanisms: Explaining biological cognition. Oxford University Press (Online). 10.1093/oso/9780198866282.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198866282.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  254. Piccinini, G. , and Craver, C.
    (2011) Integrating psychology and neuroscience: Functional analyses as mechanism sketches. Synthese, 183 (3), 283–311. 10.1007/s11229‑011‑9898‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9898-4 [Google Scholar]
  255. Piepers, D. W. , & Robbins, R. A.
    (2012) A review and clarification of the terms “holistic,” “configural,” and “relational” in the face perception literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 3 , Article 559. 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00559
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00559 [Google Scholar]
  256. Pitcher, D. , Duchaine, B. , Walsh, V. , Yovel, G. , & Kanwisher, N.
    (2011) The role of lateral occipital face and object areas in the face inversion effect. Neuropsychologia, 49 (13), 3448–3453. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.08.020
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.08.020 [Google Scholar]
  257. Popper, K.
    (1959) The logic of scientific discovery. Hutchinson.
     [Google Scholar]
  258. Popper, K. R.
    (1972) Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  259. Povinelli, D. J.
    (1998) Animal self-awareness: A debate — can animals empathize? Maybe not. Scientific American Presents: Exploring Intelligence, 9 , 72–75.
     [Google Scholar]
  260. Pritchard, D. , Turri, J. , & Carter, J.
    (2018) Knowledge. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/knowledge/
     [Google Scholar]
  261. Promet, L. , & Bachman, T.
    (2022) A comparative analysis of empirical theories of consciousness. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research and Practice. 10.1037/cns0000341
     https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000341 [Google Scholar]
  262. Psillos, S.
    (1999) Scientific realism: How science tracks truth. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  263. (2002) Causation and explanation. Acumen. 10.1017/UPO9781844653317
     https://doi.org/10.1017/UPO9781844653317 [Google Scholar]
  264. Putnam, H.
    (1975) Mind, language and reality: Philosophical papers. V.2. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511625251
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625251 [Google Scholar]
  265. Pylyshyn, Z. W.
    (1984) Computation and cognition: Toward a foundation for cognitive science. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/2004.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2004.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  266. Radner, D. , & Radner, M.
    (1989) Animal consciousness. Prometheus Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  267. Rakover, S. S.
    (1975) Tolerance of pain as a measure of fear. Learning and Motivation, 6 (1), 43–61. 10.1016/0023‑9690(75)90034‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(75)90034-X [Google Scholar]
  268. Rakover, S. S.
    (1979) Fish (tilapia aurea), as rats, learn shuttle better than lever-bumping (press) avoidance tasks: A suggestion for functionally similar universal reactions to conditioned fear-arousing stimulus. American Journal of Psychology, 92 (3), 489–495. 10.2307/1421567
     https://doi.org/10.2307/1421567 [Google Scholar]
  269. (1980) Role of intertrial interval following escape or avoidance response in bar-press avoidance. Learning and Motivation, 11 (2), 220–237. 10.1016/0023‑9690(80)90014‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0023-9690(80)90014-4 [Google Scholar]
  270. (1983) Hypothesizing from introspections: A model for the role of mental entities in psychological explanation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 13 (2), 211–230. 10.1111/j.1468‑5914.1983.tb00473.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1983.tb00473.x [Google Scholar]
  271. (1990) Metapsychology: Missing links in behavior, mind and science. Paragon/Solomon.
     [Google Scholar]
  272. (1996) The place of consciousness in the information processing approach: The mental-pool thought experiment. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19 , 535–536. 10.1017/S0140525X00082066
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00082066 [Google Scholar]
  273. (1997) Can psychology provide a coherent account of human behavior? A proposed multi-explanation-model theory. Behavior and Philosophy, 25 , 43–76.
     [Google Scholar]
  274. (1999) The computer that simulated John Searle in the Chinese room. New Ideas in Psychology, 17 , 55–66. 10.1016/S0732‑118X(98)00016‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-118X(98)00016-6 [Google Scholar]
  275. (2002a) Featural vs. configurational information in faces: A conceptual and empirical analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 93 (1), 1–30. 10.1348/000712602162427
     https://doi.org/10.1348/000712602162427 [Google Scholar]
  276. (2002b) Scientific rules of the game and the mind/body: A critique based on the theory of measurement. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 9 (11), 52–58.
     [Google Scholar]
  277. (2007) To understand a cat: Methodology and philosophy. Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.70
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.70 [Google Scholar]
  278. (2011) The configural processing hypothesis and the face-inversion effect. In Y.-J. Zhang (Ed.), Advances in face image analysis: Techniques and technologies (pp. 316–333). IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑61520‑991‑0.ch017
     https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-991-0.ch017 [Google Scholar]
  279. (2011/2012a) A plea for methodological dualism and multi-explanation framework in psychology. Behavior and Philosophy, 39/40 , 17–43.
     [Google Scholar]
  280. (2011/2012b) Methodological dualism and multi-explanation framework: Replies to criticisms and further developments. Behavior and Philosophy, 39/40 , 107–125.
     [Google Scholar]
  281. (2012) A feature-inversion effect: Can an isolated feature show behavior like the face-inversion effect?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19 (4), 617–624. 10.3758/s13423‑012‑0264‑4
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0264-4 [Google Scholar]
  282. (2013) Explaining the face-inversion effect: The face–scheme incompatibility (FSI) model. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20 (4), 665–692. 10.3758/s13423‑013‑0388‑1
     https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0388-1 [Google Scholar]
  283. (2017) The eye-size illusion is handled by two separate processes. American Journal of Psychology, 130 (3), 329–337. 10.5406/amerjpsyc.130.3.0329
     https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.130.3.0329 [Google Scholar]
  284. (2018) How to explain behavior: A critical review and new approach. Lexington Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  285. (2019a) Animals suffer too — A response to Akhtar’s “Animal pain and welfare: Can pain sometimes be worse for them than for us?” Journal of Mind and Behavior, 40 (3–4), 113–122.
     [Google Scholar]
  286. (2019b) The conscious unit (CU) model: A preliminary outline of a new approach to consciousness. Communications of the Blyth Institute (CBI), 1 (2), 5–12. 10.33014/issn.2640‑5652.1.2.rakover.1
     https://doi.org/10.33014/issn.2640-5652.1.2.rakover.1 [Google Scholar]
  287. (2020) Why has the field of psychology not developed like the natural sciences?Journal of Mind and Behavior, 41 (3–4), 247–266.
     [Google Scholar]
  288. (2021a) The two factor theory of understanding (TFTU): Consciousness and procedures. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 42 (3–4), 347–370.
     [Google Scholar]
  289. (2021b) Understanding human conduct: The innate and acquired meaning of life. Lexington Books. 10.5040/9781978737778
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781978737778 [Google Scholar]
  290. (2023a) AI and consciousness. AI and Society. 10.1007/s00146‑023‑01663‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01663-8 [Google Scholar]
  291. (2023b) Is a conscious robot a scientific hypothesis or just a faith?Journal of Mind and Behavior, 44 , 147–156.
     [Google Scholar]
  292. (2023c) What will happen if science develops a theory of consciousness? Negative ramifications. Journal of Conscious Evolution, 17 , Article 11.
     [Google Scholar]
  293. (2024) The induced-consciousness theory (ICT): A new conceptual delineation. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 45 (2), 203–218.
     [Google Scholar]
  294. Rakover, S. S. , & Cahlon, B.
    (2001) Face recognition: Cognitive and computational processes. John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.31
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.31 [Google Scholar]
  295. Rakover, S. S. , & Lurie, A.
    (2020) Why is an inverted car identified much better than an inverted face?American Journal of Psychology, 133 (1), 43–48. 10.5406/amerjpsyc.133.1.0043
     https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.133.1.0043 [Google Scholar]
  296. Rakover, S. S. , & Teucher, B.
    (1997) Facial inversion effects: Part and whole relationship. Perception & Psychophysics, 59 (5), 752–761. 10.3758/BF03206021
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206021 [Google Scholar]
  297. Ramsey, W.
    (2020) Eliminative materialism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2020/entries/materialism-eliminative
     [Google Scholar]
  298. Reggia, J.
    (2013) The rise of machine consciousness: Studying consciousness with computational models. Neural Networks, 44 , 112–131. 10.1016/j.neunet.2013.03.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2013.03.011 [Google Scholar]
  299. Rescorla, M.
    (2025) The computational theory of mind. In Edward N. Zalta , & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2025/entries/computational-mind/
     [Google Scholar]
  300. Revonsuo, A.
    (2015) Hard to see the problem?Journal of Consciousness Studies, 22 (3–4), 52–67.
     [Google Scholar]
  301. Rhodes, G. , Brak, S. , Taylor, K. , & Tan, S.
    (1989) Expertise and configural coding in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 80 (3), 313–331. 10.1111/j.2044‑8295.1989.tb02323.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1989.tb02323.x [Google Scholar]
  302. Rickman, P.
    (2009) Is psychology science?Philosophy Now, 74 , 6–7.
     [Google Scholar]
  303. Robb, D. , & Heil, J.
    (2019) Mental causation. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/mental-causation/
     [Google Scholar]
  304. Rosenberg, A.
    (1988) Philosophy of social science. Westview Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  305. Rosenthal, D. M.
    (2004) Varieties of higher-order theory. In R. J. Gennaro (Ed.), Higher-order theories of consciousness: An anthology (pp. 17–44). John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.56.04ros
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.56.04ros [Google Scholar]
  306. (2005) Consciousness and mind. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198236979.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198236979.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  307. Rosenthal, D. , & Weisberg, J.
    (2008) Higher-order theories of consciousness. Scholarpedia, 3 (5), 4407. 10.4249/scholarpedia.4407
     https://doi.org/10.4249/scholarpedia.4407 [Google Scholar]
  308. Rossion, B.
    (2008) Picture–plane inversion leads to qualitative changes of face perception. Acta Psychologica, 128 (2), 274–289. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  309. (2009) Distinguishing the cause and consequence of face inversion: The perceptual field hypothesis. Acta Psychologica, 132 (3), 300–312. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.08.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  310. Rowe, B.
    (2012) Retrospective: Julian Jaynes and “The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind.”American Journal of Psychology, 125 (1), 95–124. 10.5406/amerjpsyc.125.1.0095
     https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.125.1.0095 [Google Scholar]
  311. Rowlands, M.
    (2001) Consciousness and higher-order thoughts. Mind and Language, 16 (3), 290–310. 10.1111/1468‑0017.00171
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00171 [Google Scholar]
  312. (2007) Mysterianism. In M. Velmans & S. Schnieder (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to consciousness (pp. 335–345). Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470751466.ch27
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470751466.ch27 [Google Scholar]
  313. Russell, S. J. , & Norvig, P.
    (2003) Artificial intelligence: A modern approach (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  314. Salmon, W. C.
    (1990) Four decades of scientific explanation. University of Minnesota Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  315. Samuels, R. S. , & Faucher, L.
    (2004) Reason and rationality. In I. Niiniluoto , M. Sintonen , & J. Wolenski (Eds.), Handbook of epistemology. Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑1986‑9_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-1986-9_4 [Google Scholar]
  316. Sanbonmatsu, D. M. , & Johnston, W. A.
    (2019) Redefining science: The impact on theory development in social and behavioral research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14 (4), 672–690. 10.1177/1745691619848688
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619848688 [Google Scholar]
  317. Sato, W. , Kochiyama, T. , & Yoshikawa, S.
    (2011) The inversion effect for neural and emotional facial expressions on amygdala activity. Brain Research, 1378 , 84–90. 10.1016/j.brainres.2010.12.082
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.12.082 [Google Scholar]
  318. Sattin, D. , Magnani, F. G. , Bartesaghi, L. , Caputo, M. , Fittipaldo, V. , Cacciatore, M. , Picozzi, M. , & Leonardi, M.
    (2021) Theoretical models of consciousness: A scoping review. Brain Sciences, 11 (5), 535. 10.3390/brainsci11050535
     https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci11050535 [Google Scholar]
  319. Scheffel, J.
    (2020) On the solvability of the mind–body problem. Axiomathes, 30 (3), 289–312. 10.1007/s10516‑019‑09454‑x
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-019-09454-x [Google Scholar]
  320. Schrӧdinger, E.
    (1992) What is life? The physical aspects of the living cell. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139644129
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139644129 [Google Scholar]
  321. Schueler, G. F.
    (2003) Reasons and purposes: Human rationality and the teleological explanation of action. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/0199250375.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/0199250375.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  322. Schwitzgebel, E.
    (2019) Introspection. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/introspection/
     [Google Scholar]
  323. Seager, W.
    (2004) A cold look at HOT theory. In R. J. Gennaro (Ed.), Higher-order theories of consciousness: An anthology. John Benjamins. 10.1075/aicr.56.14sea
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.56.14sea [Google Scholar]
  324. Searle, J. R.
    (1980) Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3 (3), 417–457. 10.1017/S0140525X00005756
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756 [Google Scholar]
  325. Searle, J. R.
    (1997) The mystery of consciousness. A New York Review Book.
     [Google Scholar]
  326. Searle, J.
    (2005) Consciousness. In T. Honderich (Ed.). The Oxford companion to philosophy. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  327. Selmer, B. , & Govindarajulu, N. S.
    (2024) Artificial intelligence. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2024/entries/artificial-intelligence/
     [Google Scholar]
  328. Seth, A. K.
    (in press). Conscious artificial intelligence and biological naturalism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 10.1017/S0140525X25000032
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X25000032 [Google Scholar]
  329. Seth, A. K. , & Bayne, T.
    (2022) Theories of consciousness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 23 , 439–452. 10.1038/s41583‑022‑00587‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-022-00587-4 [Google Scholar]
  330. Seth, A. K. , Dienes, Z. , Cleeremans, A. , Overgaard, M. , & Pessoa, L.
    (2008) Measuring consciousness: relating behavioral and neurophysiological approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12 (8), 314–321. 10.1016/j.tics.2008.04.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.04.008 [Google Scholar]
  331. Shear, J.
    (Ed.) (1997) Explaining consciousness: The hard problem. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  332. Shepard, R. N. , & Metzler, J.
    (1971) Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171 (3972), 701–703. 10.1126/science.171.3972.701
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.171.3972.701 [Google Scholar]
  333. Sherry, D.
    (2011) Thermoscopes, thermometers, and the foundations of measurement. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 42 (4), 509–524. 10.1016/j.shpsa.2011.07.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2011.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  334. Smart, J. J. C.
    (2017) The mind/brain identity theory. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2017 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/mind-identity/
     [Google Scholar]
  335. Smith, J.
    (2024) Self-consciousness. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/self-consciousness/
     [Google Scholar]
  336. Sprenger, J. , & Hartman, S.
    (2019) Bayesian philosophy of science. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199672110.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199672110.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  337. Stanciu, M. M.
    (2014) The explanatory gap: 30 years after. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences, 127 , 292–296. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.258
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.258 [Google Scholar]
  338. Stevens, S. S.
    (1946) On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103 (2684), 677–680. 10.1126/science.103.2684.677
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.103.2684.677 [Google Scholar]
  339. Stich, S. P.
    (1983) From folk psychology to cognitive science. MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  340. Strevens, M.
    (2013) No understanding without explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 44 (3), 510–515. 10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.12.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  341. Swartz, N.
    (1985) The concept of physical law. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  342. Tal, E.
    (2020) Measurement in science. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/measurement-science/
     [Google Scholar]
  343. Tanaka, J. W. , & Farah, M. J.
    (1993) Parts and wholes in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46 (2), 225–245. 10.1080/14640749308401045
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749308401045 [Google Scholar]
  344. Thagard, P.
    (2004) Why isn’t everyone a scientific realist?Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 34 (3), 363–386.
     [Google Scholar]
  345. Thompson, P.
    (1980) Margaret Thatcher: A new illusion. Perception, 9 (4), 483–484. 10.1068/p090483
     https://doi.org/10.1068/p090483 [Google Scholar]
  346. Thompson, W. H. , & Skau, S.
    (2023) On the scope of scientific hypotheses. Royal Society, Open Science10:230607.
     [Google Scholar]
  347. Tononi, G.
    (2015) Integrated information theory. Scholarpedia, 10 (1), 4164. 10.4249/scholarpedia.4164
     https://doi.org/10.4249/scholarpedia.4164 [Google Scholar]
  348. Tononi, G. , Boly, M. , Massimini, M. , & Koch, C.
    (2016) Integrated information theory: From consciousness to its physical substrate. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17 (7), 450–461. 10.1038/nrn.2016.44
     https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.44 [Google Scholar]
  349. Trendler, G.
    (2009) Measurement theory, psychology and the revolution that cannot happen. Theory & Psychology, 19 (5), 579–599. 10.1177/0959354309341926
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354309341926 [Google Scholar]
  350. Trendler, G.
    (2019) Conjoint measurement undone. Theory & Psychology, 29 (1), 100–128. 10.1177/0959354318788729
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354318788729 [Google Scholar]
  351. Tsuchiya, N. , Andrillon, T. , & Haum, A.
    (2020) A reply to “the unfolding argument”: Beyond functionalism/behaviorism and toward a science of causal structure theories of consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition, 79 (12), 102877–102981. 10.1016/j.concog.2020.102877
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2020.102877 [Google Scholar]
  352. Tye, M.
    (1995) Ten problems of consciousness. MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/6712.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6712.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  353. Uher, J.
    (2021) Psychology’s status as a science: Peculiarities and intrinsic challenges. Moving beyond its current deadlock towards conceptual integration. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 55 (2), 212–224. 10.1007/s12124‑020‑09545‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-020-09545-0 [Google Scholar]
  354. Uttal, W. R.
    (2005) Neural theories of mind: Why the mind–brain problem may never be solved. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  355. (2014) Are neuroreductionist explanations of cognition possible?Behavior and Philosophy, 41 , 37–64.
     [Google Scholar]
  356. Valentine, T.
    (1988) Upside-down faces: A review of the effect of inversion on face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 79 (4), 471–491. 10.1111/j.2044‑8295.1988.tb02747.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1988.tb02747.x [Google Scholar]
  357. Vallance, C.
    (2022, June13). Google engineer says Lamda AI system may have its own feelings. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-61784011
     [Google Scholar]
  358. Vallar, G.
    (2017) Short-term memory. Reference module in neuroscience and biobehavioral psychology. Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  359. van Fraassen, B. C.
    (1980) The scientific image. Clarendon Press. 10.1093/0198244274.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/0198244274.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  360. van Gulick, R.
    (1995) What would count as explaining consciousness?In T. Metzinger , (Ed.), Conscious experience. Ferdinand Schoningh.
     [Google Scholar]
  361. (2022) Consciousness. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/consciousness/
     [Google Scholar]
  362. van Riel, R. , & van Gulick, R.
    (2019) Scientific reduction. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2019 ed.). Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/scientific-reduction/
     [Google Scholar]
  363. (2024) Scientific reduction. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2024/entries/scientific-reduction/
     [Google Scholar]
  364. Velmans, M.
    (1991) Is human information processing conscious?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14 (4), 651–669. 10.1017/S0140525X00071776
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00071776 [Google Scholar]
  365. (1996) Author’s response: Consciousness and the “causal paradox.”Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19 (3), 538–542. 10.1017/S0140525X00082078
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00082078 [Google Scholar]
  366. Vimal, R. L. P , & Sansthana, D. A.
    (2010) On the quest of defining consciousness. Mind and Matter, 8 (1), 93–121.
     [Google Scholar]
  367. Von Eckardt, B.
    (1993) What is cognitive science?MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  368. von Wright, G. H.
    (1971) Explanation and understanding. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
     [Google Scholar]
  369. Wahbeh, H. , Radin, D. , Cannard, C. , & Delorme, A.
    (2022) What if consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain? Observational and empirical challenges to materialistic models. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.955594
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.955594 [Google Scholar]
  370. Weidemann, G. , Satkunarajah, M. , & Lovibond, P. F.
    (2016) I think, therefore eyeblink: The importance of contingency awareness in conditioning. Psychological Science, 27 (4), 467–475. 10.1177/0956797615625973
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615625973 [Google Scholar]
  371. Weinberg, S.
    (1993) Dreams of a final theory. Vintage Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  372. Weinert, F.
    (1995) Laws of nature — Laws of science. In F. Weinert (Ed.), Laws of nature: Essays on the philosophical, scientific and historical dimensions. de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110869859.3
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110869859.3 [Google Scholar]
  373. Weisberg, J.
    (2011) Misrepresenting consciousness. Philosophical Studies, 154 (4), 409–433. 10.1007/s11098‑010‑9567‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-010-9567-3 [Google Scholar]
  374. Wenger, D. M.
    (2003) The mind’s best trick: How we experience conscious will. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (2), 65–69. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00002‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00002-0 [Google Scholar]
  375. Woodward, J.
    (2000) Explanation and invariance in the special sciences. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 51 (2), 197–254. 10.1093/bjps/51.2.197
     https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/51.2.197 [Google Scholar]
  376. (2002) Explanation. In P. Machamer & M. Silberstein (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to the philosophy of science. Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756614.ch3
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756614.ch3 [Google Scholar]
  377. (2003) Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  378. Wu, W. , & Morales, J.
    (2024) The neuroscience of consciousness. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/consciousness-neuroscience/
     [Google Scholar]
  379. Xiao, W. S. , Fu, G. , Quinn, P. C. , Sun, Y. H. , Xiao, N. G. , Wang, Q. , Chen, G. , Pascalis, O. , Damon, F. , & Lee, K.
    (2014) The eye-size illusion: Psychophysical characteristics, generality, and relation to holistic face processing. Perception, 43 (3), 265–274. 10.1068/p7647
     https://doi.org/10.1068/p7647 [Google Scholar]
  380. Yaron, I. , Mellon, L. , Pitts, M. , & Mudrik, L.
    (2022) The ConTraSt database for analyzing and comparing empirical studies of consciousness theories. Nature Human Behaviour, 6 (4), 593–604. 10.1038/s41562‑021‑01284‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01284-5 [Google Scholar]
  381. Yin, R. K.
    (1969) Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81 (2), 141–145. 10.1037/h0027474
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027474 [Google Scholar]
  382. Young, A. W. , Hellawell, D. , & Hay, D. C.
    (1987) Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 16 (6), 747–759. 10.1068/p160747
     https://doi.org/10.1068/p160747 [Google Scholar]
  383. Yovel, G. , & Kanwisher, N.
    (2005) The neural basis of the behavioral face-inversion effect. Current Biology, 15 (24), 2256–2262. 10.1016/j.cub.2005.10.072
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2005.10.072 [Google Scholar]
  384. Zittoun, T. , Gillespie, A. , & Cornish, F.
    (2009) Fragmentation or differentiation: Questioning the crisis in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 43 (2), 104–115. 10.1007/s12124‑008‑9083‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-008-9083-6 [Google Scholar]
  385. Zubek, J. P.
    (1969) Sensory deprivation: Fifteen years of research. Appleton Century Crofts.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/books/9789027243782
Loading

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027243782
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027243782
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Chapter
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027243782
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error