Abstract

The central problem which cognitive scientists face in studying thinking is that thinking cannot be observed directly by other people. The traditional solution has been to rely on introspective methods, where individuals observe their own thinking and reflect on its characteristics. In everyday life, the most common technique involves asking people questions about their thinking, knowledge, and strategies. Psychologists have refined the methods for questioning individuals by designing questionnaires and structured interviews. However, these two ways of obtaining information about thinking share two fundamental methodological problems. First, the accuracy of the reports cannot be assessed, because in naturally occurring situations in everyday life the investigator doesn't have any other empirical evidence against which to evaluate the validity of the subjects' reported information. Hence, psychologists are forced to trust the subjects to provide valid information. The second issue concerns whether even those individuals who strive to give accurate reports are able to access and supply valid information on the cognitive processes that mediate their behavior.