Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  RIGIDITY
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

ON ‘ACTUALLY’ AND ‘DTHAT’: TRUTH-CONDITIONAL DIFFERENCES IN POSSIBLE WORLD SEMANTICS

100%
Martí G., Martínez-Fernández J.
Organon F. medzinárodný časopis pre analytickú filozofiu
|
2019
|
vol. 26
|
issue 3
491 – 504
EN
Although possible world semantics is a powerful tool to represent the semantic properties of natural language sentences, it has been often argued that it is too coarse: with the tools that possible world semantics puts at our disposal, any relevant semantic difference has to be a truth conditional difference representable as a difference in intension. A case that raises questions about the ability of possible worlds semantics to make the appropriate discriminations is the distinction between rigidity and direct reference, an issue deeply connected to the representation of the behaviour of two operators: ‘dthat’ and ‘actually’. Differences between the mode of operation of ‘dthat’ and ‘actually’ have been observed, but they have not been examined in depth. Our purpose is to explore systematically to what extent the observed differences between the two operators have truth conditional consequences that are formally representable in possible world semantics.
2

HOW NON-EXPERTS FAIL WHERE EXPERTS DO NOT: IMPLICATIONS OF EXPERTISE FOR RESISTANCE TO COGNITIVE RIGIDITY

100%
Necka E., Kubik T.
Studia Psychologica
|
2012
|
vol. 54
|
issue 1
3 – 14
EN
Experts’ resistance to cognitive rigidity is discussed with reference to two aspects of the phenomenon of mental inflexibility: inter-domain rigidity and intra-domain rigidity. Although there are reasons to expect increased rigidity of experts outside the domain of their expertise, we hypothesized that they would be less prone to mental set within their domain of specialization. In two experiments (N = 72, N = 82), Experts, Intermediates and Novices solved tasks fostering mental set. Their goal was to solve a series of tasks of the same kind and then work on a task that was similar to the previous ones at the superficial level, while being substantially changed at the deep level of analysis. As a result, the effect of mental set (Einstellung) was expected to appear. The experiments were conducted in two different domains: management (Experiment 1) and English grammar (Experiment 2). Experts proved more resistant to intra-domain rigidity in both domains. In addition, they were faster and more accurate, thus replicating classic effects of expertise. The results regarding the role of anxiety in resistance to rigidity were unclear. The results suggest that, with reference to rigidity of experts, it is justifiable to distinguish between inter-domain and intra-domain rigidity. Experts, as compared to non-experts, should be regarded as more resistant to the phenomenon of intra-domain rigidity.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.