Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25755203›Full record

ReviewTopics in cognitive science2015

Grounding cognitive-level processes in behavior: the view from dynamic systems theory.

Larissa K Samuelson, Gavin W Jenkins, John P Spencer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Topics in cognitive science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Larissa K SamuelsonDepartment of Psychology and DeLTA Center, University of Iowa.
Gavin W Jenkins
John P Spencer

Funding

The Dynamics of Visual Attention and Word LearningR01HD045713 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI SAMUELSON, LARISSA K · 2004 to 2019
$3.6M
How location information is maintained in memoryR01MH062480 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI SPENCER, JOHN P · 2002 to 2012
$1.6M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD045713NICHD NIH HHS R01HD045713NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH062480NIMH NIH HHS R01MH62480
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marr's seminal work laid out a program of research by specifying key questions for cognitive science at different levels of analysis. Because dynamic systems theory (DST) focuses on time and interdependence of components, DST research programs come to very different conclusions regarding the nature of cognitive change. We review a specific DST approach to cognitive-level processes: dynamic field theory (DFT). We review research applying DFT to several cognitive-level processes: object permanence, naming hierarchical categories, and inferring intent, that demonstrate the difference in understanding of behavior and cognition that results from a DST perspective. These point to a central challenge for cognitive science research as defined by Marr-emergence. We argue that appreciating emergence raises questions about the utility of computational-level analyses and opens the door to insights concerning the origin of novel forms of behavior and thought (e.g., a new chess strategy). We contend this is one of the most fundamental questions about cognition and behavior.

Indexed as

Systems TheoryChild DevelopmentCognitionConcept FormationGeneralization, PsychologicalHumansInfantCognitive processesDynamic systemsEmergenceLevels of analysisMarrRepresentationsWord learning

Identifiers

PMID25755203
PMCPMC4475347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.