IN DEFENSE OF REPRESENTATION AS MEDIATION
Target Article by Markman and Dietrich on Representation Mediation

<hr> Arthur B. Markman (1998) In Defense of Representation as Mediation. Psycoloquy: 9(48) Representation Mediation (1)<br>Versions: <a href=ftp://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/pub/psycoloquy//1998.volume.9/psyc.98.9.48.representation-mediation.1.markman>ASCII</a> <a href=http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?9.48>formatted</a><hr>
<TITLE>Psycoloquy 9(48): In Defense of Representation as Mediation</TITLE>
<H1>IN DEFENSE OF REPRESENTATION AS MEDIATION<br>
Target Article by Markman and Dietrich on Representation Mediation <br>
</H1>
<ADDRESS>Arthur B. Markman<br>
Department of Psychology<br>
University of Texas<br>
Austin, TX 78712<br>
http://www.psy.utexas.edu/psy/FACULTY/Markman/index.html<br>
<br>
Eric Dietrich<br>
PACCS Program in Philosophy<br>
Binghamton University<br>
Binghamton, NY<br>
http://www.binghamton.edu/philosophy/home/faculty/index.htm<br>
<br>
<a href=mailto:markman@psy.utexas.edu>markman@psy.utexas.edu</a> 
<a href=mailto:dietrich@binghamton.edu>dietrich@binghamton.edu</a> 
</ADDRESS>
<P><H1>Abstract</H1><BLOCKQUOTE>
Some cognitive scientists have asserted that cognitive
processing is not well modeled by classical notions of
representation and process that have dominated psychology and
artificial intelligence since the cognitive revolution. In response
to this claim, the concept of a mediating state is developed.
Mediating states are the class of information-carrying internal
states used by cognitive systems, and as such are accepted even by
those researchers who reject representations.  The debate over
representation, then, is actually one about what additional
properties of mediating states are necessary for explaining
cognitive processing. Five properties that can be added to
mediating states are examined for their importance in cognitive
models.
</BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><H1>Keywords</H1><i>
compositionality, computation, connectionism, discrete
states, dynamic Systems, explanation, information, meaning,
mediating states, representation, rules, semantic Content symbols
</i>
<H1>References</H1><UL>
<LI>Anderson, J. R. (1983a). The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 
<LI>Anderson, J. R. (1983b). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261-295. 
<LI>Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the Mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 
<LI>Baillargeon, R. (1987). Object permanence in 3.5- and 4.5-month old infants. Developmental Psychology, 23, 655-664. 
<LI>Barsalou, L. W. (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Barin Sciences 22 (in press) http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/bbs/Archive/bbs.depue.html 
<LI>Bassok, M., Chase, V. M., & Martin, S. A. (1998). Adding apples and oranges: Semantic constraints on application of formal rules. Cognitive Psychology, 35(2), 99-134. 
<LI>Bickhard, M. & Terveen, L. (1995). Foundational Issues in Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland Elsevier. 
<LI>Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94(2), 115-147. 
<LI>Brooks, L. (1978). Non-analytic concept formation and memory for instances. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and Categorization (pp. 169-211). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 
<LI>Brooks, R. A. (1991). Intelligence without representation.  Artificial Intelligence, 47, 139-159. 
<LI>Chalmers, D. J. (1990). Why Fodor and Pylyshyn were wrong: The simplest refutation. Paper presented at the The Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Cambridge, MA. 
<LI>Cheng, P. W., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). On the natural selection of reasoning theories. Cognition, 33, 285-313. 
<LI>Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1991). The sound pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Clark, A. (1993). Associative Engines: Connectionism, concepts, and representational change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic priming. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407-428. 
<LI>Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31(3), 187-276. 
<LI>Dietrich, E. (1990). Computationalism. Social Epistemology, 4(2), 135-154. 
<LI>Dietrich, E. (1994). Thinking Computers and the Problem of Intentionality. In E. Dietrich, ed., Thinking computers and virtual persons. San Diego: Academic Press. 
<LI>Dretske, F. (1981). Knowledge and the Flow of Information.  Cambridge, MA: MIT/Bradford. 
<LI>Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14(2), 179-212. 
<LI>Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41(1), 1-63. 
<LI>Fodor, J., & McLaughlin, B. (1990). Connectionism and the problem of systematicity: Why Smolensky's solution doesn't work. Cognition, 35, 183-204. 
<LI>Fodor, J. A., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition, 28, 3-71. 
<LI>Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170. 
<LI>Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning (pp. 199-241). New York: Cambridge University Press. 
<LI>Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structural alignment in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45-56. 
<LI>Harnad, S. (1990). The Symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42 335-346. 
<LI>Herskovits, A. (1986). Language and spatial cognition: An interdisciplinary study of the prepositions in English. New York: Cambridge University Press. 
<LI>Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1989). Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 13(3), 295-355. 
<LI>Hummel, J. E., & Biederman, I. (1992). Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. Psychological Review, 99(3), 480-517. 
<LI>Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical access and mapping.  Psychological Review, 104(3), 427-466. 
<LI>Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental Models. New York: Cambridge University Press. 
<LI>Johnson-Laird, P. N., Byrne, R. M., & Tabossi, P. (1989).  Reasoning by model: The case of multiple quantification. Psychological Review, 96(4), 658-673. 
<LI>Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1991). Deduction.  Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 
<LI>Kaplan, A. S., & Medin, D. L. (1997). The coincidence effect in similarity and choice. Memory and Cognition, 25(4), 570-576. 
<LI>Keane, M. T., Ledgeway, T., & Duff, S. (1994). Constraints on analogical mapping: A comparison of three models. Cognitive Science, 18, 387-438. 
<LI>Keysar, B., & Bly, B. (1995). Intuitions of the transparency of idioms: Can one keep a secret by spilling the beans? Journal of Memory and Language, 34(1), 89-109. 
<LI>Kim, J. J., Pinker, S., Prince, A., & Parasada, S. (1991). Why no mere mortal has ever flown out to center field. Cognitive Science, 15(2), 173-218. 
<LI>Klein, M., Shapiro, E., & Kandel, E. R. (1980). Synaptic plasticity and the modulation of the Ca++ current. Journal of Experimental Biology, 89, 117-157. 
<LI>Kolodner, J. (1993). Case-based Reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc. 
<LI>Koriat, A. (1994). Memory's knowledge of its own knowledge: The accessibility account of the feeling of knowing. In J. Metcalfe & A. P.  Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and Brain. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Landau, B., & Jackendoff, R. (1993). "What" and "where" in spatial language and spatial cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(2), 217-266. 
<LI>Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211-240. 
<LI>Langacker, R. W. (1986). An introduction to cognitive grammar. Cognitive Science, 10(1), 1-40. 
<LI>Marcus, G. F., Brinkmann, U., Clahsen, H., Wiese, R., & Pinker, S. (1995). German inflection: The exception that proves the rule. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 189-256. 
<LI>Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1993). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25(4), 431-467. 
<LI>Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification. Psychological Review, 85(3), 207-238. 
<LI>Metcalfe, J., & Shimamura, A. P. (Eds.). (1994). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Newell, A. (1990). Unified Theories of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 
<LI>Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1963). GPS: A program that simulates human thought. In E. A. Feigenbaum & J. Feldman (Eds.), Computers and Thought : R. Oldenbourg KG. 
<LI>Norman, D. A., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1975). Explorations in Cognition. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman. 
<LI>Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(1), 39-57. 
<LI>Novick, L. R. (1990). Representational transfer in problem solving. Psychological Science, 1(2), 128-132. 
<LI>Palmer, S. E. (1977). Hierarchical structure in perceptual representations. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 441-474. 
<LI>Perner, J. F. (1991). Understanding the representational mind. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Pollack, J. B. (1990). Recursive distributed representations. Artificial Intelligence, 46(1-2), 77-106. 
<LI>Pollack, J. L. (1994). Justification and defeat. Artificial Intelligence, 67, 377-407. 
<LI>Reder, L. M., & Ritter, F. E. (1992). What determines initial feeling of knowing? Familiarity with question terms, not with the answer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(3), 435-451. 
<LI>Reed, S. K., & Bolstad, C. A. (1991). Use of examples and procedures in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology:  Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(4), 753-766. 
<LI>Regier, T. (1996). The human semantic potential. Cambridge, MA:  The MIT Press. 
<LI>Rips, L. J. (1994). The Psychology of Proof: Deductive reasoning in human thinking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Ross, B. H. (1984). Remindings and their effects in learning a cognitive skill. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 371-416. 
<LI>Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 
<LI>Schank, R. C., Kass, A., & Riesbeck, C. K. (1994). Inside case-based explanation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 
<LI>Shannon, C. (1949). The Mathematical Theory of Communication.  Urbana, IL: Univ. of Illinois Press. 
<LI>Simonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 158-174. 
<LI>Smith, L. B. (1989). From global similarities to kinds of similarities: The construction of dimensions in development. In S.  Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning (pp.  146-178). New York: Cambridge University Press. 
<LI>Smith, L. B., & Sera, M. D. (1992). A developmental analysis of the polar structure of dimensions. Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 99-142. 
<LI>Smolensky, P. (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11(1), 1-74. 
<LI>Smolensky, P. (1991). Connectionism, constituency, and the language of thought. In B. Loewer & G. Rey (Eds.), Meaning in Mind: Fodor and his critics . Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. 
<LI>Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4), 327-352. 
<LI>Tversky, A., & Gati, I. (1982). Similarity, separability and the triangle inequality. Psychological Review, 89(2), 123-154. 
<LI>van Gelder, T., & Port, R. F. (1995). It's about time: An overview of the dynamical approach to cognition. In R. F. Port & T. v.  Gelder (Eds.), Mind as Motion . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 
<LI>Wason, P. C., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1972). Psychology of Reasoning Structure and Content. London: Routledge. 
<LI>Wellman, H. M. (1990). The Child's Theory of Mind. Cambridge, MA:  The MIT Press. 
</UL>