Structured Representations in the Control of Behavior Cannot Be So Easily Dismissed: A Reply to Botvinick and Plaut (2006)

Autor/inn/en	Cooper, Richard P.; Shallice, Tim
Titel	Structured Representations in the Control of Behavior Cannot Be So Easily Dismissed: A Reply to Botvinick and Plaut (2006)
Quelle	In: Psychological Review, 113 (2006) 4, S.929-931 (3 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0033-295X
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; Behavior; Criticism; Networks; Models; Interaction; Training; Role + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Kritik; Analogiemodell; Interaktion; Ausbildung; Rollen
Abstract	M. Botvinick and D. C. Plaut (see record 2006-12689-009) argued that many of the criticisms of their earlier simple recurrent network (SRN) model of routine sequential action raised by R. P. Cooper and T. Shallice (see record 2006-12689-008) were criticisms of the specific implementation rather than criticisms of the underlying theory. Cooper and Shallice (2006) reject this assessment and raise concerns with several implementational adjustments that Botvinick and Plaut made to address their criticisms of the SRN account. Moreover, Botvinick and Plaut are questioned for not addressing potential interactions between their suggested implementational changes. Cooper and Shallice also reconsider the implications of the role of the training set in shaping the SRN model's normal and error-prone behavior, the role of goals in their original interactive activation network model and routine behavior more generally, and the relation between the putative routine and nonroutine action control systems within the 2 models. (Author).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications.
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10