Relook on
“Comparative analysis
of intention theories”
Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar
Agenda
• Introduction to Intention theories
• Problem Identification
• Critique
• Conclusion
Intention Theories
Human
Intentions
Psychology
Cognitive
Science
Computer
Science
Philosophy
Social
Psychology
Folk
Psycho...
Normal Approach
• Go through the theories and compare them (not
paying much attention to discipline) using
dimensions such...
What’s the problem then?
• Which theory is complete?
• Which theory is universal?
• Which theory has empirical backing?
• ...
Selected Theories
Theory of Reasoned Action
Theory of Planned Behavior
Folk Concept of Intentionality
Discerning Intention...
Theory of
Reasoned
Action /
Theory of
Planned
Behavior
Folk Concept
of
Intentionality
Discerning
intentions in
dynamic
act...
Discerning
intentions in
dynamic
action
Intentionality
of intentions
and actions
Belief Desire
Intention
Model
Theory of
R...
Discerning
intentions in
dynamic
action
Intentionality
of intentions
and actions
Belief Desire
Intention
Model
Theory of
R...
Cross-referencing
Theory of
Reasoned
Action/
Planned
Behavior
Discerning
intentions
from
dynamic
action
Intentionality
of ...
Current Conclusions What assumptions do these theories take and what are the implications?
If the assumptions are Compone...
Brickbats & suggestions…
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Comparative Analysis of Intention Theories

389

Published on

Presentation on the topic 'Comparative Analysis of Intention Theories' done as part of the requirement for the course "Philosophy of Research"

Published in: Education, Technology, Spiritual
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
389
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Comparative Analysis of Intention Theories

  1. 1. Relook on “Comparative analysis of intention theories” Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar
  2. 2. Agenda • Introduction to Intention theories • Problem Identification • Critique • Conclusion
  3. 3. Intention Theories Human Intentions Psychology Cognitive Science Computer Science Philosophy Social Psychology Folk Psychology  Use these theories to build a conceptual model for social tagging systems
  4. 4. Normal Approach • Go through the theories and compare them (not paying much attention to discipline) using dimensions such as Methodology, Research Methods, Parent Theories, Citation History etc • Select the one that appears closest to our research context • Build a conceptual model on top of the selected theory • Conduct research to see if the model fits • ….
  5. 5. What’s the problem then? • Which theory is complete? • Which theory is universal? • Which theory has empirical backing? • Which theory has been extended by other researchers? • What assumptions do these theories take and what are the implications? • Does the nature of the discipline play a significant role when assessing a theory? • Are there any hidden dimensions that significantly differentiates the selected theories?
  6. 6. Selected Theories Theory of Reasoned Action Theory of Planned Behavior Folk Concept of Intentionality Discerning Intentions in dynamic human action Intentionality of Intention and Action Belief Desire Intention model
  7. 7. Theory of Reasoned Action / Theory of Planned Behavior Folk Concept of Intentionality Discerning intentions in dynamic action Intentionality of intentions and actions Attitude towards the behavior Belief Desire Intention Model Subjective Norms Intention Behavior Belief Desire Intentions Intentionality Skill Awareness Belief Desire 3 types of Knowledge Structure Detection Intentions Belief Desire Intention Action Belief Desire Prior Intentions Intentional Action Perceived Behavior Control Game based Experiment Language understanding based Survey Experiments & Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Method Perspective
  8. 8. Discerning intentions in dynamic action Intentionality of intentions and actions Belief Desire Intention Model Theory of Reasoned Action / Theory of Planned Behavior Folk Concept of Intentionality Assumptions • Intentions are prerequisite for behavior -> CHALLENGED Assumptions • No prior knowledge of the person is needed to infer intentionality -> CHALLENGABLE • The questions try to infer the presence of the factors by analysing the texts -> HIGHLY CHALLENGABLE • Study is reliant on people's perception about human actions • Everyone can interpret language in the same way -> HIGHLY CHALLENGABLE Assumptions • Intentions are not isomorphic with action i.e. an action can be related to many intentions • An action is split into many steps Assumptions • Intention is mapped to a action Assumptions • No data given on how beliefs change - CHALLENGABLE • Desires are already known and fixed - DEBATABLE CHALLENGABLE NATURE OF ASSUMPTIONS • Component -based • Language -based • Similarity in people • Component –based • Reality -based • Component -based • Component –based • Definition -based
  9. 9. Discerning intentions in dynamic action Intentionality of intentions and actions Belief Desire Intention Model Theory of Reasoned Action / Theory of Planned Behavior Folk Concept of Intentionality Weakness & Limitations (W&L) • Behavioral intention is seen as “weighted sum” of two variables Weakness & Limitations • Perception of intentionality based only on western culture • Uses explicated language for testing. Not reality based. Weakness & Limitations • Works only when action is observed from start to end • Seemingly doesn’t differentiate between intention and intentionality Weakness & Limitations • Generalistic Weakness & Limitations • Definition of Beliefs and Desires is not generalizable • Intention is always seen as a commitment to the action IMPLICATIONS • Pro-positivism • Universality is affected • Can be used in linguistic studies • Generalizability is affected • Applicability to online world • Generalizability is affected PURPOSE OF THEORY PREDICTIVE DESCRIPTIVE & EXPLANATORY DESCRIPTIVE DESCRIPTIVE & EXPLANATORY DESCRIPTIVE & EXPLANATORY
  10. 10. Cross-referencing Theory of Reasoned Action/ Planned Behavior Discerning intentions from dynamic action Intentionality of intention and action Folk Concept of Intentionality Belief Desire Intention Model Cognitive Science
  11. 11. Current Conclusions What assumptions do these theories take and what are the implications? If the assumptions are Component-based , they cannot be taken lightly. Universality and Generalizability factors are affected as a part of implications of weakness and limitations of the theory.  Does the nature of the discipline play a significant role when assessing a theory? Yes, the perspective and type of research methods are contingent on the discipline. Type of evidence also differs – Empirical vs Conceptual  Are there any hidden dimensions that significantly differentiates the selected theories? Perspective and ‘Nature of assumptions’ are two hidden dimensions that are to be considered  There cannot be a single intention model – there needs to be separate intention and intentionality model for conducting research  There is no single perfect model/theory but it is debatable to combine components from models of different disciplines. They have to be tested if combined.
  12. 12. Brickbats & suggestions…
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×