Nativism Versus Neuroconstructivism: Rethinking the Study of Developmental Disorders
Nativism Versus Neuroconstructivism: Rethinking the Study of Developmental Disorders
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0014506
复制
发表时间：
2009-01-01
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Karmiloff-Smith, Annette
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Karmiloff-Smith, Annette
这篇文章认为，一个占主导地位的心理学，语言学，神经科学和哲学的遗传疾病如何指向在人类大脑中的解离模块的先天规范应该被一个动态的，神经建构主义的方法，其中基因，大脑，认知和环境相互作用多向取代。本文挑战了当前对一系列问题的思考：（a）在一个领域中显著更好的分数一定表明一个完整的模块吗？(b)正常范围内的分数意味着什么？(c)心理年龄匹配有什么问题？(d)为什么完整模块的概念不太可能？(e)发展障碍是否意味着联系而非分离？(f)对于发育中的个体来说，环境是一样的吗？文章最后通过研究采取神经建构主义方法的含义，并认为人类智力不是一种状态（即，不是可以是完整的或受损的静态内置模块的集合）而是进程（即，基因、大脑、认知、行为和环境之间动态的、多方向的相互作用在发育时间上的突现特性），没有发育过程，特定领域的结果是不可能的。
This article argues that one dominant position in psychology, linguistics, neuroscience, and philosophy about how genetic disorders point to the innate specification of dissociated modules in the human brain should be replaced by a dynamic, neuroconstructivist approach in which genes, brain, cognition, and environment interact multidirectionally. The article challenges current thinking about a series of questions: (a) Do significantly better scores in one domain necessarily indicate an intact module? (b) What do scores in the normal range suggest? (c) What is wrong with mental-age matching? (d) Why is the notion of an intact module unlikely? (e) Do developmental disorders suggest associations rather than dissociations? (f) Is the environment the same for atypically developing individuals? The article concludes by examining the implications of taking a neuroconstructivist approach and by arguing that human intelligence is not a state (i.e., not a collection of static, built-in modules that can be intact or impaired) but a process (i.e., the emergent property over developmental time of dynamic, multidirectional interactions between genes, brain, cognition, behavior, and environment) with domain-specific outcomes impossible without the process of development.