Relationships Organize Information in Mind and Nature: Empirical Findings of Action–Reaction Relationships (R) in Cognitive and Material Complexity

• Published in: Systems (Basel) Vol. 10; no. 3; p. 71
• Main Authors: Cabrera, Derek, Cabrera, Laura, Cabrera, Elena
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Basel MDPI AG 01.06.2022
• Subjects: action–reaction; Causality; cognitive complexity; Complexity; DSRP theory; Feedback; Hypotheses; Literature reviews; Metacognition; Normal distribution; relationships; Social sciences; Statistical analysis; Statistical methods; System theory; systems thinking; universals
• ISSN: 2079-8954; 2079-8954
• DOI: 10.3390/systems10030071

Diverse phenomena such as feedback, interconnectedness, causality, network dynamics, and complexity are all born from Relationships. They are fundamentally important, as they are transdisciplinary and synonymous with connections, links, edges, and interconnections. The foundation of systems thinking and systems themselves consists of four universals, one of which is action–reaction Relationships. They are also foundational to the consilience of knowledge. This publication gives a formal description of and predictions of action–reaction Relationships (R) or “R-rule”. There are seven original empirical studies presented in this paper. For these seven studies, experiments for the subjects were created on software (unless otherwise noted). The experiments had the subjects complete a task and/or answer a question. The samples are generalizable to a normal distribution of the US population and they vary for each study (ranging from N = 407 to N = 34,398). With high statistical significance the studies support the predictions made by DSRP Theory regarding action–reaction Relationships including its universality as an observable phenomenon in both nature (ontological complexity) and mind (cognitive complexity); mutual dependencies on other universals (i.e., Distinctions, Systems, and Perspectives); role in structural predictions; internal structures and dynamics; efficacy as a metacognitive skill. In conclusion, these data suggest the observable and empirical existence, parallelism (between cognitive and ontological complexity), universality, and efficacy of action–reaction Relationships (R).