Quartz, S. & Sejnowski, T.J. (1997). The neural basis of cognitive development: A constructivist manifesto.

Abstract not found

Abstract not found

The central problem for pragmatics is that sentence meaning vastly underdetermines speaker’s meaning. The goal of pragmatics is to explain how the gap between sentence meaning and speaker’s meaning is bridged. This paper defends the broadly Gricean view that pragmatic interpretation is ultimately an exercise in mind-reading, involving the inferential attribution of intentions. We argue, however, that the interpretation process does not simply consist in applying general mind-reading abilities to a particular (communicative) domain. Rather, it involves a dedicated comprehension module, with its own special principles and mechanisms. We show how such a metacommunicative module might have evolved, and what principles and mechanisms it might contain.

Inducing causal relationships from observations is a classic problem in scientific inference, statistics, and machine learning. It is also a central part of human learning, and a task that people perform remarkably well given its notorious difficulties. People can learn causal structure in various settings, from diverse forms of data: observations of the co-occurrence frequencies between causes and effects, interactions between physical objects, or patterns of spatial or temporal coincidence. These different modes of learning are typically thought of as distinct psychological processes and are rarely studied together, but at heart they present the same inductive challenge—identifying the unobservable mechanisms that generate observable relations between variables, objects, or events, given only sparse and limited data. We present a computational-level analysis of this inductive problem and a framework for its solution, which allows us to model all these forms of causal learning in a common language. In this framework, causal induction is the product of domain-general statistical inference guided by domain-specific prior knowledge, in the form of an abstract causal theory. We identify 3 key aspects of abstract prior knowledge—the ontology of entities, properties, and relations that organizes a domain; the plausibility of specific causal relationships; and the functional form of those relationships—and show how they provide the constraints that people need to induce useful causal models from sparse data.

Evolutionary approaches to judgment under uncertainty have led to new data showing that untutored subject reliably produce judgments that conform to may principles of probability theory when (a) they are asked to compute a frequency instead of the probability of a single event, and (b) the relevant information is expressed as frequencies. But are the frequencycomputation systems implicated in these experiments better at operating over some kinds of input than others? Principles of object perception and principles of adaptive design led us to propose the individuation hypothesis: that these systems are designed to produce wellcalibrated statistical inferences when they operate over representations of “whole ” objects, events, and locations. In a series of experiments on Bayesian reasoning, we show that human performance can be systematically improved or degraded by varying whether a correct solution requires one to compute hit and false-alarm rates over “natural ” units, such as whole objects, as opposed to inseparable aspects, views, and other parsings that violate evolved principles of object construal. The ability to make well-calibrated probability judgments depends, at a very basic level, on the ability to count. The

What aspects of knowledge emerge in children prior to their first contacts with the objects of their knowledge, and what aspects emerge through the shaping effects of experience with those objects? What aspects of knowledge are constant over human development from the moment that infants begin to make sense of the world, and what aspects change as children grow and learn? What aspects of knowledge are universal, and what aspects vary across people in different cultures or with different educational backgrounds? Finally, what aspects of knowledge can people change in themselves or their children with sufficient insight or effort, and what aspects are invari-

Research on judgment and choice has been dominated by functionalist assumptions that depict people as either intuitive scientists animated by epistemic goals or intuitive economists animated by utilitarian ones. This article identifies 3 alternative social functionalist starting points for inquiry: people as pragmatic politicians trying to cope with accountability demands from key constituencies in their lives, principled theologians trying to protect sacred values from secular encroachments, and prudent prosecutors trying to enforce social norms. Each functionalist framework stimulates middle-range theories that specify (a) cognitive–affective–behavioral strategies of coping with adaptive challenges and (b) the implications of these coping strategies for identifying empirical and normative boundary conditions on judgmental tendencies classified as errors or biases within the dominant research programs. Once an esoteric specialty of a small cadre of cognitive psychologists, experimental research on judgment and choice has—to judge just by citation counts—become psychology’s leading intellectual export to the social sciences as well as to a host of applied fields. The influence of this research program has spread (critics might say “metastasized”) into such diverse domains as

Evolution brought brains and minds into a world initially devoid of inteUlgent life. The evolutionary process designed the neural machinery that generates in-tehgent behavior, and important insights into how this machinery works can be gained by understanding how evolution constructs organisms. This is the ratio-nale that underlies research in evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychology was founded on interloclang contributions from evolutionary biology, cognitive science, psychology, anthropology, and neuro-science. It reflects an attempt to think through, from first principles, how cur-rent knowledge from these various fields can be integrated into a single, consistent, sciennfic framework for the study of the mind and brain (Cosmides

It is often asserted that young children’s word learning is guided by constraints or internal biases. Constraints are broadly described as ‘‘any factor that favors some possibilities over others’ ’ (Medin et al., 1990). Researchers have argued that specialized lexical constraints cause children to make some inferences about word meanings before others. An analysis shows that the concept constraint is not informative because it does not differentiate a circumscribed set of word learning behaviors. Defining constraints as innate and domain-specific does not remedy this problem. We cannot separate the effects of so-called constraints or biases from a wide range of cognitive and contextual influences on children’s inferences about novel word meanings. This conclusion is supported by a selective review of these influences. The summary highlights our need for an explanatory framework that is sufficiently rich to capture the flexibility and diversity of children’s word learning. The core of such a framework is summarized as a set of general characteristics of human word learning. These characteristics must serve as a starting point for any viable theory of word learning. Prescriptions for future development of a viable framework are suggested. © 2000 Academic Press Word learning 1 is a complex and intractable problem for which researchers have offered a seemingly simple and powerful solution. The problem is that preschoolers ’ prolific acquisition of new words (averaging a half dozen per day; Carey, 1978) seems impossible given the radical indeterminacy of word meanings. A novel word has an indefinite number of possible meanings, and it is unlikely that children regularly receive information that unambiguously specifies a single meaning. Yet children often infer new words ’ correct or Preparation of the manuscript was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Spencer