title: Theory and Metatheory in the Study of Dual Processing: Reply to Comments.
abstract: In this article, we respond to the four comments on our target article. Some of the commentators suggest that we have formulated our proposals in a way that renders our account of dual-process theory untestable and less interesting than the broad theory that has been critiqued in recent literature. Our response is that there is a confusion of levels. Falsifiable predictions occur not at the level of paradigm or metatheory-where this debate is taking place-but rather in the instantiation of such a broad framework in task level models. Our proposal that many dual-processing characteristics are only correlated features does not weaken the testability of task-level dual-processing accounts. We also respond to arguments that types of processing are not qualitatively distinct and discuss specific evidence disputed by the commentators. Finally, we welcome the constructive comments of one commentator who provides strong arguments for the reality of the dual-process distinction.
authors.affiliation: University of Plymouth j.evans@plymouth.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Jonathan St B T
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Evans
authors.affiliation: University of Toronto.
authors.forename: Keith E
authors.initials: KE
authors.lastname: Stanovich
keywords: decision making; default-interventionist; dual processes; individual differences; reasoning