Dual Process Theory Case Study

A system that scientist have observed for example multitasking, when overload, the brain shifts from responsible for memory to responsible for tasks, this results in difficulty to learn the task or remember the action you have made. It is in fact, a possible struggle the world is suffering, some more than others, could be the poverty of attention. Anderson has taken in his own hands to explore and interact with a variety of experts, for example David Meyer, who while interacting with, is distracted with the universe daily activities, manages to respond to Andersons crisis of attention by stating, “People aren’t aware what’s happening to their mental processes”, he says, “in the same way that people years ago couldn’t look into their lungs

1. System Thinking: System thinking is nothing but instead of focusing on only one particular issue, we have to analyze and try to understand the entire system on the whole. With this kind of analyzation, we can easily find a solution to the problem as the problems are not confined to only a particular area or time. We might find a solution for a particular issue, somewhere in the whole system by analyzing the entire system completely. We should try to relate the actions and the consequences on the whole as the issues occur at different time levels, not confined to only one particular time level. We have to have knowledge of the relation between different departments of an organization and the relation between them and the functionality between the departments as to how they are related in an organization. We generally focus on only one particular issue rather than seeing the bug picture and that shouldn’t be done. In system thinking we analyze the big picture.

Kahneman’s systems of thought is largely built on the framework of Stanovich and West (2000; as cited in Kahneman, 2003). It describes two types of thought processes: system 1 (perception and intuition) and system 2 (reasoning).

With today’s fast moving pace there are many challenges we face that demands more non-linear system thinking instead of cause and effect linear thinking. In The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge stated, “system thinking is a discipline for seeing wholes,” rather than reacting to a specific part or event. System thinking involves shifting from the linear to non-linear thinking and/or the rational to the intuitive or thin-slicing type decisions. System thinking is

Kahneman argues that the illusion of validity comes from fast thinking because it is “prone to doubt.” Meaning, people naturally think quickly because they need a reason and so they do not have time to question their explanation. However, Kahneman neglects to mention that fast thinking roots itself in the fear of uncertainty. Kahneman begins his essay by describing his experience in evaluating

• Systems thinking—a way of thinking about, and a language for describing and understanding, the forces and interrelationships that shapes the behavior of systems. This discipline helps us see how to change systems more effectively, and to act more in tune with the larger processes of the natural and economic world.

|Information Processing |1. I.P was based on a computer model, examines each step of the thinking process. |

Cognitive psychology is a branch of psychology which focuses on the brain and how we think, Cognitive psychologists believe that our thought processes explain behaviour and make these assumptions by looking at our perception, language, attention and memory. (Jarvis,M,2005). One of the main assumptions is that cognitive psychologists often use a computer to explain how we think and behave. Based on this computer analogy, cognitive psychology is interested in the way the brain inputs, stores and outputs information and how behaviour can be influenced by the way we deal with information. (Sammons, A, n.d) However an important criticism directed at the cognitive approach is that it often ignores the way in which other factors such as biological and environmental explain how we process information. (cognitive psychology, n.d)

In the late 90’s Margaret Stoebe and Henk Schut presented a theory called “The Dual Process Model.”

At any given second, the brain is carrying out trillions of mental processes. It's no wonder that our brain is constantly looking for strategies and rules of thumb that can be applied across various situations to ease the burden of executing all those mental processes. These rules are especially helpful when it comes to making decisions and judgments that are complex. In our attempt to simplify information processes,

The concept I will be focusing on is System 1 vs System 2. In class we learned how different system 1 is from system 2. System 1 is fast and reactive process we have. This system is the usual automatic go to process. In this system is where stereotypes and assumptions are used. System 2 on the other hand is a more analytic process. This process is usually slower and has higher thinking approach. When one uses this system one begins to question the issue or problem and made come up with a better solution than system 1. This process is not automatic like system 1.

     Theorists claim that our cognitive processes are like that of a computer. They have used this as a model to break down the process of the

* Developments in computer science would lead to parallels being drawn between human thought and the computational functionality of computers, opening entirely new areas of psychological thought. Allen Newell and Herbert Simon spent years developing the concept of artificial intelligence (AI) and later worked with cognitive psychologists regarding the implications of AI. The effective result was more of a framework conceptualization of mental functions with

A good portion of part 1 is spent telling us about the two systems, system-1 and system-2. System-1 operates automatically and quickly with no effort applied to it. While system-2, allocates attention to effortful mental computation.

Systems thinking is a method of thinking that looks at the interconnectedness between different elements rather than a linear cause and effect approach and sees patterns of change rather than fixed “snapshots”. In essence it is a view on the “whole picture” (Anderson, R 1994).