CONNECTIONISM IS A PROGRESSIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMME:
"COGNITIVE" CONNECTIONIST MODELS ARE JUST MODELS
Commentary on Green on Connectionist-Explanation

Abstract

Connectionist models are cognitive models which can serve two functions. They can demonstrate the computational feasibility of a cognitive theory (in this sense they model cognitive theories), or they can suggest new ways of conceiving the functional structure of the cognitive system. The latter leads to connectionist theories with new theoretical constructs, such as stable attractors, or soft constraint satisfaction. A number of examples of connectionist models and theories demonstrate the fertility of connectionism, a progressive research programme in Lakatos's (1970) sense. Green's (1998a) specificity argument against connectionist theoretical constructs fails because it relies upon a simplistic view of theoretical constructs that would undermine even the "gene" construct, Green's paradigmatic example of a theoretical entity in good standing. This view of theoretical entities is based upon a simplistic Popperian picture of science.

Keywords

References

• Ellis, A.W. and Young, A.W. (1998). Human Cognitive Neuropsychology: A Textbook with readings.
• Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14, 179-211.
• Elman, J. L. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. Cognition, 48, 71-99.
• Elman, J. L., Bates, E. A., Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., and Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking Innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. MIT Press.
• Gardner, H. (1985). The Mind's New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution. Basic Books.
• Gold, E. M. (1967). Language identification in the limit. Information and control, 16, 447-474.
• Goldsmith, M. (1998). Connectionist modeling and theorizing: Who does the explaining and how? PSYCOLOQUY 9(18) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.18.connectionist-explanation.15.green.
• Grainger, J. and Jacobs, A. M. (1998). Localist connectionism fits the bill. PSYCOLOQUY 9(10) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.10.connectionist-explanation.7.green.
• Green, C. D. (1998a). Are connectionist models theories of cognition? PSYCOLOQUY 9(4) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.04.connectionist-explanation.1.green
• Green, D. C. (1998b). Connectionist nets are only good models if we know what they model: Reply to Lee, Van Heuveln, Morrison, and Dietrich. PSYCOLOQUY 9(23) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.23.connectionist-explanation.20.green
• Green, C. D. (1998c). Statistical analyses do not solve connectionism's problem: Reply to Medler and Dawson on Connectionist-Explanation. PSYCOLOQUY 9(15) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.15.connectionist-explanation.12.green
• Green, D. C. (1998d). Higher functional properties do not solve connectionism's problems: Reply to Goldsmith on Connectionist-Explanation. PSYCOLOQUY 9(25) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.25.connectionist-explanation.22.green.
• Green, D. C. (1998e). Realism, instrumentalism, and connectionism. Reply to Young on Connectionist-Explanation. PSYCOLOQUY 9(13) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.13.connectionist-explanation.10.green.
• Green, D. C. (1998f). The degrees of freedom would be tolerable if nodes were neural. Reply to Lamm on Connectionist-Explanation. PSYCOLOQUY 9(26) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.26.connectionist-explanation.23.green.
• Hanson, S. J. (1990). Meiosis networks. In D. S. Touretzky (Ed.) Advances in neural-information processing systems II. San Mateo: Morgan Kaufman. Pp 533-542.
• Hinton, G. E. and Shallice, T. (1991). Lesioning an attractor network: Investigations of acquired dyslexia. Psychological Review, 98, 74-95.
• Hoffman, W. C. (1998). Are neural nets a valid model of cognition? PSYCOLOQUY 9(12) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.12.connectionist-explanation.9.green.
• Horgan, T. (1997). Connectionism and the Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science. Metaphilosophy, 28, 1-30.
• Hyams, N. (1991). Seven not-so-trivial trivia of language acquisition: Comments on Wolfgang Klein. In Eubank, L. (Ed.) Point counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Kawamoto. A. H. (1993). Non-linear dynamics in the resolution of lexical ambiguity: A parallel distributed processing account. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 474-516.
• Kuhn, T. S. (1970, 2nd ed.) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press)
• Lakatos, I (1970) Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In I Lakatos and A Musgrave (eds.) Criticism and the growth of Knowledge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
• Marchman, V. and Bates, E. (1994). Continuity in lexical and morphological development: A test of the critical mass hypothesis. Journal of Child Language, 21(2), 339-366.
• Massaro, D. W. (1988). Some criticisms of connectionist models of human performance. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 213-234.
• McClelland, J. L. (1989). Parallel distributed processing: implications for cognition and development. In Parallel distributed processing: implications for psychology neurobiology (ed. R. Morris). Clarendon Press, Oxford.
• McClelland, J. L. (1993) The GRAIN model: A framework for modelling the dynamics of information processing. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 655-688
• McCloskey, M. (1991). Networks and theories: The place of connectionism in cognitive science. Psychological Science, 2, 387-395.
• Medler, D. A. and Dawson, M. R. W. (1998). Connectionism and cognitive theories. PSYCOLOQUY 9(11) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.11.connectionist-explanation.8.green.
• Miller, K. D., Keller, J. B., and Stryker, M. P. (1989). Ocular dominance column development: Analysis and simulation. Science, Vol. 245, 605-615.
• O'Brien, G. J. (1998). The role of implementation in connectionist explanation: PSYCOLOQUY 9(06) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.06.connectionist-explanation.3.green.
• Orbach, J. (1998). Do wires model neurons? PSYCOLOQUY 9(05) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.05.connectionist-explanation.2.green.
• Pinker, S. (1985). Why the child holded the baby rabbits. In Gleitman, L. and Liberman, M. (Eds.) An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Volume 1, Language. MIT Press.
• Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct. Penguin.
• Pinker, S. (1997). How The Mind Works. Allen Lane. The Penguin Press.
• Plaut, D. C. (1995). Double dissociation without modularity: Evidence from Connectionist Neuropsychology. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, Vol. 17, No. 2, 291-321.
• Plaut, D. C. and Shallice, T. (1993). Deep dyslexia: A case study of connectionist neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 10, 377-500.
• Plunkett, K. and Marchman, V. (1993). From rote learning to system building: Acquiring verb morphology in children and connectionist nets. Cognition, 48, 21-69.
• Plunkett, K., Sinha, C., Moller, M. F., and Strandsby, O. (1992). Symbol grounding or the emergence of symbols? Vocabulary growth in children and a connectionist net. Connection Science, 4, 293-312.
• Putnam, H (1974) The 'corroboration' of theories. In P. A. Schilp (ed.) The Philosophy of Karl Popper. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court.
• Raftopoulos, A. (1998). Can connectionist theories illuminate cognition? PSYCOLOQUY 9(24) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.24.connectionist-explanation.21.green.
• Rolls, E. T. (1995). A model of the operation of the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex in memory. International Journal of Neural Systems, 6 (supplement), 51-70.
• Rumelhart, D. E. and McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tense of English verbs. In J. L. McClelland, D. E. Rumelhart, and the PDP Research Group (Eds.), Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Vol. 2: Psychological and Biological models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 216-271.
• Mareschal, D. and Shultz, T. R. (1996). Generative connectionist networks and constructivist cognitive development. Cognitive Development, 11(4), 571-603.
• Rose, S. (1997). Lifelines: Biology, Freedom, and Determinism. Allen Lane.
• Seidenberg, M. (1988). Cognitive neuropsychology and language: The state of the art. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 5, 403-426.
• Smolensky, P. (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 11, 1-74.
• Stich, S and Nichols, S (1995) Folk Psychology: Simulation or Tacit Theory. In M. Davies and T. Stone (eds.) Folk Psychology. Blackwell.
• Thomas, M. S. C. (1997). Connectionist networks and knowledge representation: The case of bilingual lexical processing. Oxford D.Phil. Thesis.
• Watters, P. A. (1998). Cognitive theory and neural model: The role of local representations. PSYCOLOQUY 9(20) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/1998.volume.9/ psyc.98.9.20.connectionist-explanation.17.green. 1