Double dissociation without modularity: evidence from connectionist neuropsychology.
Double dissociation without modularity: evidence from connectionist neuropsychology.
复制标题
无模块性的双重解离：联结主义神经心理学的证据。
DOI：
10.1080/01688639508405124
复制
发表时间：
1995
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Plaut,DC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Plaut,DC
许多理论家假设认知系统由一组封装的处理组件或模块组成，每个组件或模块专用于执行特定的认知功能。根据这种观点，脑损伤后认知任务的选择性损伤（如双重解离所证明的那样）自然可以解释为特定处理成分的丧失。相比之下，当前的调查详细研究了联结主义网络受损后具体和抽象单词阅读之间的双重分离，该联结主义网络通过意义发音，但没有可分离的组件（Plaut＆Shallice，1993）。正如模块化理论所假设的那样，网络中引起双重解离的功能专业化与网络结构并不透明相关。此外，考虑网络中数量相等的单个病变之间的效应分布，引起了对单例研究解释的具体关注。研究结果强调了在关于认知系统如何正常运行和受损后的特定计算假设的背景下将神经心理学数据与认知理论联系起来的必要性。
Many theorists assume that the cognitive system is composed of a collection of encapsulated processing components or modules, each dedicated to performing a particular cognitive function. On this view, selective impairments of cognitive tasks following brain damage, as evidenced by double dissociations, are naturally interpreted in terms of the loss of particular processing components. By contrast, the current investigation examines in detail a double dissociation between concrete and abstract word reading after damage to a connectionist network that pronounces words via meaning and yet has no separable components (Plaut & Shallice, 1993). The functional specialization in the network that gives rise to the double dissociation is not transparently related to the network's structure, as modular theories assume. Furthermore, a consideration of the distribution of effects across quantitatively equivalent individual lesions in the network raises specific concerns about the interpretation of single-case studies. The findings underscore the necessity of relating neuropsychological data to cognitive theories in the context of specific computational assumptions about how the cognitive system operates normally and after damage.