Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis

Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suff...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Overgaard, Morten [verfasserIn]

Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2004

Anmerkung:	© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: Synthese - Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936, 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:141 ; year:2004 ; number:2 ; month:08 ; pages:217-231

Links:	Volltext

DOI / URN:	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0

Katalog-ID:	OLC2037233582

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	OLC2037233582
003	DE-627
005	20230504054447.0
007	tu
008	200819s2004 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)OLC2037233582
035			\|a (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 400 \|a 150 \|a 300 \|q VZ
084			\|a 5,2 \|a 7,11 \|a 11 \|a 5,1 \|2 ssgn
084			\|a LING \|q DE-30 \|2 fid
100	1		\|a Overgaard, Morten \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
264		1	\|c 2004
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen \|b n \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Band \|b nc \|2 rdacarrier
500			\|a © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004
520			\|a Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention.
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t Synthese \|d Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 \|g 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 \|w (DE-627)129479187 \|w (DE-600)204075-X \|w (DE-576)014860856 \|x 0039-7857 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:141 \|g year:2004 \|g number:2 \|g month:08 \|g pages:217-231
856	4	1	\|u https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 \|z lizenzpflichtig \|3 Volltext
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_OLC
912			\|a FID-LING
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHY
912			\|a SSG-OLC-CHE
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHI
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_21
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_72
912			\|a GBV_ILN_130
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2006
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2410
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4028
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4029
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4046
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4082
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4193
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4318
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 141 \|j 2004 \|e 2 \|c 08 \|h 217-231

Indexfelder

author_variant	m o mo
matchkey_str	article:00397857:2004----::ofudnfcosnota
hierarchy_sort_str	2004
publishDate	2004
allfields	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 doi (DE-627)OLC2037233582 (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Overgaard, Morten verfasserin aut Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis 2004 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004 Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4029 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 141 2004 2 08 217-231
spelling	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 doi (DE-627)OLC2037233582 (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Overgaard, Morten verfasserin aut Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis 2004 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004 Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4029 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 141 2004 2 08 217-231
allfields_unstemmed	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 doi (DE-627)OLC2037233582 (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Overgaard, Morten verfasserin aut Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis 2004 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004 Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4029 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 141 2004 2 08 217-231
allfieldsGer	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 doi (DE-627)OLC2037233582 (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Overgaard, Morten verfasserin aut Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis 2004 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004 Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4029 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 141 2004 2 08 217-231
allfieldsSound	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 doi (DE-627)OLC2037233582 (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Overgaard, Morten verfasserin aut Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis 2004 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004 Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. Enthalten in Synthese Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 (DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856 0039-7857 nnns volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4029 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 AR 141 2004 2 08 217-231
language	English
source	Enthalten in Synthese 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231
sourceStr	Enthalten in Synthese 141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231 volume:141 year:2004 number:2 month:08 pages:217-231
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
dewey-raw	400
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	Synthese
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Overgaard, Morten @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2004-08-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	129479187
dewey-sort	3400
id	OLC2037233582
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2037233582</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504054447.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2004 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2037233582</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="a">300</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,2</subfield><subfield code="a">7,11</subfield><subfield code="a">11</subfield><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Overgaard, Morten</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Synthese</subfield><subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936</subfield><subfield code="g">141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129479187</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)204075-X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014860856</subfield><subfield code="x">0039-7857</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:141</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2004</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:217-231</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-CHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_130</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2410</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4028</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4029</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4082</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4193</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">141</subfield><subfield code="j">2004</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield><subfield code="h">217-231</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Overgaard, Morten
spellingShingle	Overgaard, Morten ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
authorStr	Overgaard, Morten
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)129479187
format	Article
dewey-ones	400 - Language 150 - Psychology 300 - Social sciences
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut
collection	OLC
remote_str	false
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	0039-7857
topic_title	400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
topic	ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING
topic_unstemmed	ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING
topic_browse	ddc 400 ssgn 5,2 fid LING
format_facet	Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	nc
hierarchy_parent_title	Synthese
hierarchy_parent_id	129479187
dewey-tens	400 - Language 150 - Psychology 300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology
hierarchy_top_title	Synthese
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)129479187 (DE-600)204075-X (DE-576)014860856
title	Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
ctrlnum	(DE-627)OLC2037233582 (DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p
title_full	Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
author_sort	Overgaard, Morten
journal	Synthese
journalStr	Synthese
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	400 - Language 100 - Philosophy & psychology 300 - Social sciences
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2004
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	217
author_browse	Overgaard, Morten
container_volume	141
class	400 150 300 VZ 5,2 7,11 11 5,1 ssgn LING DE-30 fid
format_se	Aufsätze
author-letter	Overgaard, Morten
doi_str_mv	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0
dewey-full	400 150 300
title_sort	confounding factors in contrastive analysis
title_auth	Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
abstract	Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004
abstractGer	Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention. © Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHY SSG-OLC-CHE SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_130 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2410 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4027 GBV_ILN_4028 GBV_ILN_4029 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4082 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4193 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4318 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325
container_issue	2
title_short	Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis
url	https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0
remote_bool	false
ppnlink	129479187
mediatype_str_mv	n
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0
up_date	2024-07-03T14:21:47.684Z
_version_	1803568029559160832
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2037233582</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504054447.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2004 xx \|\|\|\|\| 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2037233582</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="a">150</subfield><subfield code="a">300</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,2</subfield><subfield code="a">7,11</subfield><subfield code="a">11</subfield><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Overgaard, Morten</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Several authors within psychology, neuroscience and philosophy take for granted that standard empirical research techniques are applicable when studying consciousness. In this article, it is discussed whether one of the key methods in cognitive neuroscience – the contrastive analysis – suffers from any serious confounding when applied to the field of consciousness studies; that is to say, if there are any systematic difficulties when studying consciousness with this method that make the results untrustworthy. Through an analysis of theoretical arguments in favour of using contrastive analysis, combined with analyses of empirical findings, I conclude by arguing for three factors that currently are confounding of research using contrastive analysis. These are (1) unconscious processes, (2) introspective reports, and (3) attention.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Synthese</subfield><subfield code="d">Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1936</subfield><subfield code="g">141(2004), 2 vom: Aug., Seite 217-231</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129479187</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)204075-X</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014860856</subfield><subfield code="x">0039-7857</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:141</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2004</subfield><subfield code="g">number:2</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:217-231</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1023/B:SYNT.0000043019.64052.e0</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHY</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-CHE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_130</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2410</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4028</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4029</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4082</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4193</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4318</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">141</subfield><subfield code="j">2004</subfield><subfield code="e">2</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield><subfield code="h">217-231</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4010468

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Confounding Factors in Contrastive Analysis

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?