5. Process reference standards

5.1 Reference types

Each process carries two reference arrays:

• fundamental_references: Paradigm-defining or foundational references. These are the papers or books that established the process as a research construct. Typically pre-2000, often classic citations.

• recent_references: Recent or standard-review references. These are post-2010 papers (preferred) that provide modern entry points into the literature: reviews, meta-analyses, or influential empirical papers.

5.2 Current state

All 407 reference entries in process_details.json have empty title fields. This is a known future-phase item. The citation_string field carries the human-readable citation (e.g., “Rescorla & Wagner (1972) in Classical Conditioning II”), and journal and year fields are populated. Title fill is deferred to a separate literature-lookup pass.

5.3 Quality expectations

• Every process should have at least one fundamental reference and at least one recent reference.

• Citation strings should be clean - no embedded markdown headers, no stitched-together text fragments.

• References for the 6 Awareness/Agency/Metacognition rows added and the 5 problem-solving/valuation additions were written fresh; all inherited references come from the original Cognitive Atlas source documents.

• The Levy & Glimcher (2012) citation was corrected: journal is Current Opinion in Neurobiology 22:1027-1038, not Journal of Neuroscience.

5.4 Reference provenance (proposed, not yet implemented)

A future enhancement would mark each reference with its source (atlas, supplement, gap_analysis, claude_generated, user_provided). Currently all references are indistinguishable in origin. Provenance is not a quality signal - atlas means “inherited from the Cognitive Atlas starting corpus” (uncurated), not “validated.”