This dissertation would not have been possible without the help and support of many people. Most of all, I would like to extend my gratitude to Rod Grupen for many years of inspiring work, our discussions, and his guidance. Without his support and vision, I cannot imagine that the journey would have been as enormously enjoyable and rewarding as it turned out to be. I am very excited about what we discovered during my time at UMass, but there is much more to be done. I look forward to what comes next! In addition to providing professional inspiration, Rod was a great person to work with and for—creating a warm and encouraging laboratory atmosphere, motivating us to stay in shape for his annual half-marathons, and ensuring a sufficient amount of cake at the weekly lab meetings. Thanks for all your support, Rod! I am very grateful to my thesis committee—Andy Barto, David Jensen, and Rachel Keen—for many encouraging and inspirational discussions. Their comments and feedback significantly contributed to the form of this document. I would especially

Scores on cognitive tasks used in intelligence tests correlate positively with each other, that is, they display a positive manifold of correlations. The positive manifold is often explained by positing a dominant latent variable, the g factor, associated with a single quantitative cognitive or biological process or capacity. In this article, a new explanation of the positive manifold based on a dynamical model is proposed, in which reciprocal causation or mutualism plays a central role. It is shown that the positive manifold emerges purely by positive beneficial interactions between cognitive processes during development. A single underlying g factor plays no role in the model. The model offers explanations of important findings in intelligence research, such as the hierarchical factor structure of intelligence, the low predictability of intelligence from early childhood performance, the integration/differentiation effect, the increase in heritability of g, and the Jensen effect, and is consistent with current explanations of the Flynn effect.

Transitions in cognitive development: prospects and limitations of a neural

Introduction The original goals of the work described in the target article were threefold. First, I wanted to encourage a direct confrontation of situated, embodied and dynamical ideas with cognitive phenomena, in the hopes of furthering debate on the role of these ideas in cognitive science. Second, I wanted to describe a specific research methodology that could concretely ground such a debate, and to illustrate in some technical detail how a situated, embodied, minimally-cognitive agent could be developed and dynamically analyzed. Third, I wanted to use this model agent as a springboard to begin to explore some of the larger implications of these ideas for explanation in cognitive science. Judging from the range of the commentary, it appears that, at the very least, the paper was successful at provoking a broader discussion of these issues. I would like to thank 2 all of my colleagues for taking the time to provide detailed comments on my paper. I have certainly found the process

Introduction The original goals of the work described in the target paper were threefold. First, I wanted to encourage a direct confrontation of situated, embodied, and dynamical ideas with cognitive phenomena, in the hopes of furthering debate on the role of these ideas in cognitive science. Second, I wanted to describe a specific research methodology that could concretely ground such a debate, and to illustrate in some technical detail how a situated, embodied, minimally cognitive agent could be developed and dynamically analyzed. Third, I wanted to use this model agent as a springboard to begin to explore some of the larger implications of these ideas for explanation in cognitive science. Judging from the range of the commentary, it appears that, at the very least, the paper was successful at provoking a broader discussion of these issues. I would like to thank all of my colleagues for taking the time to provide detailed comments on my paper. I have certainly found the process cons

Abstract not found

Focus on Function – a randomized controlled trial comparing two rehabilitation interventions for young children with cerebral palsy