ARE CONNECTIONIST MODELS THEORIES OF COGNITION?
Target Article by Green on Connectionist Explanation

Abstract

This paper explores the question of whether connectionist models of cognition should be considered to be scientific theories of the cognitive domain. It is argued that in traditional scientific theories, there is a fairly close connection between the theoretical (unobservable) entities postulated and the empirical observations accounted for. In connectionist models, however, hundreds of theoretical terms are postulated -- viz., nodes and connections -- that are far removed from the observable phenomena. As a result, many of the features of any given connectionist model are relatively optional. This leads to the question of what, exactly, is learned about a cognitive domain modelled by a connectionist network.

Keywords

References

• Atkinson, R. C. & Shiffrin, R. M. (1971) The control of short-term memory. Scientific American 225:82-90.
• Baddeley (1992) Working memory. Science 255:556-559.
• Berwick, R. C. (1985) The acquisition of syntactic knowledge, MIT Press.
• Churchland, P. M. (1990) Cognitive activity in artificial neural networks. In: Thinking: An invitation to cognitive science (Vol. 3), ed. D. N. Osherson & E. E. Smith, MIT Press.
• Crick, F.H.C. & Asanuma, C. (1986) Certain aspects of the anatomy and physiology of the cerebral cortex. In: Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (vol. 2), ed. McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E., MIT Press.
• Fodor, J. A. & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition 28:3-71.
• Hempel, C. G. (1952) Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science. University of Chicago Press.
• Jacoby, L. L. (1991) A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory & Language 30: 513-541.
• Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In: Criticism and the growth of knowledge, ed. I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Cambridge University Press.
• Levitan, I. B. & Kaczmarek, L. K.. (1991). The neuron: Cell and molecular biology. New York: Oxford University Press.
• McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E., & Hinton, G. E. (1986) The appeal of parallel distributed processing. In: Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (vol. 1), ed. Rumelhart, D. E. & McClelland, J. L., MIT Press.
• Roediger, H. L. III (1990) Implicit memory: Retention without remembering. American Psychologist 45:1043-1056.
• Roediger, H. L., III, & McDermott, K. B. (1993) Implicit memory in normal human subjects. In: Handbook of neuropsychology (Vol. 8, pp. 63-131), ed. F. Boller & J. Grafman, Elsevier.
• Schacter, D. L. (1987) Implicit memory: History and current status. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 13:501-518.
• Schacter, D. L. (1992). Understanding implicit memory: A cognitive neuroscience approach. American Psychologist 47:559- 569.
• Smolensky, P. (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11:1-73.
• Tulving, E. (1985) How many memory systems are there? American Psychologist 40:385-398.