findings from cognitive neuroscience can elucidate functional brain organization, such as the
operations performed by a particular brain area and the system of distributed, discrete neural areas
supporting a spesific cognitve representation. These findings can reveal the effect on brain organization
of individual differences (including even genetic variation) (cf. www.psy.cmu.edu, www.nsf.gov).
Another importance of cognitive neuroscience is that cognitive neuroscience provides some ways
that allow us to "obtain detailed information about the brain structures involved in different kind of
cognitive processing" (Eysenck & Keane, Cognitive Psychology, p. 521). Techniques such as MRI and
172 | Cognitive Psychology and Neuroscience
Present and Future of Research
CAT scans have proved of particular value when used on patients to discover which brain areas are
damaged. Before non-invansive methods of cognitive neuroscience were developed, examination to
know the location of "brain damage could only be established by postmortem examination" (ibid).
Knowing which brain areas related to which cognitive process would surely lead to obtain a clearer
view of brain region, hence, in the end would help in better understanding for human cognition process.
Another strength of cognitive neuroscience is that it serves as a tool to demonstrate the reality of
theoretical distinctions. For example, it has been argued by many theorists that implicit memory can be
diveded into perceptual and conceptual implicit memory; support for that view has come from PET
studies, which show that perceptual and conceptual priming tasks affected different areas of the brain
(cf. ibid, pp. 521-522).
However, cognitive neuroscience is not that perfect as a science to be able to stand alone and
answer all questions dealing with human cognition. Cognitive neuroscience has some limitations,
dealing with data collecting and data validity. In most neuroimaging studies, data are collected from
several individuals and then averaged. Some concern has arose about such averaging because of the
existence of significant individual differences. The problem was answered by Raichle (1998), who
stated that the differ in individual brain should be appreciated, however general organizing principles
emerge that transcend these differences (cf. ibid, p. 522).
Converging operations
The four approaches of experimental cognitive psychology, cognitive neuropsychology, cognitive
science and cognitive neuroscience differ in their strengths and weaknesses. Because of this reason, it
is clear that no science can stand alone in answering the questions dealing with human cognition, also
for future researches. We should use and combine the knowledge, and use the method of converging
operations "in order to maximize our understanding of human cognition" (ibid, p. 523). The method of
converging operations involves making use of a variety approaches to consider any given issue from
different perspectives (cf. ibid).
An example for such a procedure is Davachi's memory experiment(2003). First the participants
one of the words place and read, then they saw an adjective which they had to mentally pronounce
backwards if the previous word was read or they had to imagine a scene that could be described by that
adjective if the previous word was place. After learning a list of words in the described manner the
participants got a list with the learned words and the same number of new words the next day. Their
task now was to decide whether a presented word was new or one of them learned the day before. The
experiment showed that the words learned by the place method were remembered better.
So far the experiment seems to be a normal behavioral experiment characteristically for the
experimental approach. But while learning the words Davachi used an fMRI on the participants in
order to determine the activated brain regions. It became obvious that the perirhinal cortex only was
activated during the place task but not during the read task. According to that it could be concluded
that memory is better when the perirhinal cortex is activated during learning (cf. Goldstein, Cognitive
Psychology, pp. 16-19). In this case the physiological approach in this experiment explained the results
gained by the behavioral.
When the method of converging operations is applied, there are two possible outcomes: first, the
findings obtained are broadly comparable. The second is that the "findings differ significantly"
Chapter 14
(Eysenck & Keane, Cognitive Psychology, p. 523). When the findings from two approaches are
similar, this increases the confidence in the validity of the findings and in the usefulness of both
approaches. When the findings are different, this indicates the need of further research to clarify what
happens. Thus, the method of converging operations helps to prevent researchers from drawing
incorrect conclusions on the basis of limited findings from a single approach (cf. ibid, p. 523).
Theory
The field Cognitive Psychology derived from an analogy between the mind and a computer. The
idea that the mind works on the brain just as a programm does work on a computer nowadays is know
as the information-processing theory. Thereby existed an identical theoretical basis for all subfields of
Cognitive Psychology. Nevertheless in practical application when explaining concrete phenomenon
researcher tended to establish models that only focused on their subfield. Some examples handled in
this book are Baddeley's model of working memory or Pylyshyn's and Kosslyn's different theories
about imagery. Hereby a fragmentation of Cognitive Psychology emerged. In 1972 Allen Newell
criticised this tendency in his paper "You can't play 20 questions with nature and win". He stated:
" Suppose that in the next thirty years we continued as we are now going. Another hundred
phenomena, give or take a few dozen, will have been discovered and explored. [...] It seems to me that
clarity is never achieved. Matters simply become muddier and muddier as we go down through time.
Thus, far from providing the rungs of a ladder by which psychology gradually climbs to clarity, this
form of conceptual structure leads rather to an ever increasing pile of issues, which we weary of or
become diverted from, but never really settle. " (Anderson, The Atomic Components of Thought, pp. 1-
2)
Over thirty years later several attempts to create a unified theory which should avert Newell's
prediction were presented. But a widely accepted unified theory that includes at least most of the
mental phenomena still could not have been established. So the main focus of theoretical development
in Cognitive Psychology still lays on the constitution of such an overarching and unifing model.
Possible ways of reaching this goal will be discussed in the following.
Unifying Theories
Newell's own solution to the dilemma he described was based on a production system. Such a
system consist of a set of conditions and actions. Based on the given data an action is performed if the
corresponding condition is fulfilled. Hereby the data structure is changed and new conditions are
generated. The system stops either when no conditions are fulfilled or when an action includes a stop
operation. The theory Newell developed from his approach is called Soar theory of human cognition
(cf. ibid, pp. 2-3). Apart from that several other theories based on production systems exist. Here
primarily Anderson's ACT-R theory has to be mentioned since it has been partially validated against
behavioral timing data and fMRI brain localizations and timing data.
ACT-R is a cognitive architecture. It is constructed based on actual assumptions of the functioning
of human cognition. It can be used to fulfill different tasks related with human cognition like language
comprehension or the Towers of Hanoi. Apart from that researchers are able to modify the programm
in order to add their own assumptions. Here ACT-R functions quite similar to a programming
language. Thereby it is possible to compare the results gained by the model with results from human
174 | Cognitive Psychology and Neuroscience
Present and Future of Research
participants and to verify respectively to correct the model (cf. act-r.psy.cmu.edu and
http://www.carleton.ca/ics/ccmlab/actr/).
In addition to that EPIC from Meyer and Kieras and 3CAPS from Just and Carpenter are
production system theories with potential (cf. Anderson, The Atomic Components of Thought, p. 3).
But the fact that several candidates for such an overarching theory have to be referred to makes it
obvious that none of the systems really managed to be accepted from most of the researchers in
Cognitive Psychology. So far the goal to create a unifying theory has not been reached. Some possible
theories exist but the future development has to show if one of them really manages to become globally
established.
Parallel Processing
Another possibility how to reach a reunification of the field is to create a new theory. In this case
the analogy with the computer which was already the basis for the whole cognitive psychological
approach seems to be the attempt with the best chances. It has to be taken into considertation that the
information processing theory already developed over time. The traditional theory e.g. was only able to
explain bottom-up processes (like used in Atkinson's and Shiffrin's memory theory) based on its
sequential structure. But it failed to give an appropriate explanation for top-down processing which
occurs e.g. when one has certain expectations based on the circumstances and context (cf. Eysenck &
Keane, Cognitive Psychology, p. 2).
This limitation could have been overcome by keeping track with the developments in computer
science and thereby with a modification of the analogy. As more and more parallel processing
computer were build one changed the theory from sequential working to parallel processing. Thereby
one was able to explain both bottom-up and top-down processes. Furthermore the highly parallel
activation of the brain was integrated in the theory.
These developments in the theoretical view of the functioning of the brain may also give a hint to
future changes. As computer science moves on the analogy may have to be modified again. Based on
that new theories could be developed which maybe reach the goal to become an overarching theory that
includes all human cognitive abilities and that is globally accepted.
Levels of Analysis
The realization that there are important links between brain activity and cognitive functions is the
key assumption for present and future research. Complete psychological accounts of cognitive
functioning require considerations of the computational level, algorithmic level (implementation of the
computational theory, representation of the input and the algorithm of the transformation) and the brain
levels, about how the representation and the algorithm be realized physically (cf. ibid, pp. 523-524).
Here a possible reason for the differences in the theories shows up. Some of these might occur
because the descriptions used in the different theories refer to different levels of analysis. In order to
avoid misunderstandings an overarching theory therefor has to include all of these levels.
Chapter 14
Conclusion
Today's work in the field of Cognitive Psychology gives several hints how future work in this area
may look like. In practical applications improvements will probably mainly be driven by the limitations
one faces today. Here in particular the newer subfields of Cognitive Psychology will develop quick.
How such changes look like heavily depends on the character of future developments in technology.
Especially improvements in Cognitive Neuropsychology and Cognitive Neuroscience depend on the
advancements of the imaging techniques.
In addition to that the theoretical framework of the field will be influenced by such developments.
The parallel processing theory may still be modified according to new insights in computer science.
Thereby or eventually by the acceptance of one of the already existing overarching theories the
theoretical basis for the current research could be reunified.
But if it takes another 30 years to fulfill Newell's dream of such a theory or if it will happen rather
quick is still open. As a rather young science Cognitive Psychology still is subject to elementary
changes. All its practical and theoretical domains are steadily modified. Whether the trends mentioned
in this chapter are just deadends or will cause a revolution of the field could only be predicted which
definitely is hard.
References
• E. Br. Goldstein, Cognitive Psychology, Wadsworth, 2004
• M. W. Eysenck, M. T. Keane, Cognitive Psychology - A Student's Handbook, Psychology
Press Ltd, 2000
• Thagard, Paul, Cognitive Science in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, 2004
• Banich, Marie T., Neuropsycology - The Neural Bases of Mental Function, Hougthon
Mifflin Company, 1997
• Anderson, John R., Lebiere, Christian, The Atomic Components of Thought, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, 1998
Links
• http://www.psy.cmu.edu/home/research/index.html
• http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2006/nsf06557/nsf06557.html
live version • discussion • edit lesson • comment • report an error
176 | Cognitive Psychology and Neuroscience
History & Document Notes
15 HISTORY & DOCUMENT NOTES
Wikibook History
This book was created on 2006-04-08 and was developed on the Wikibooks project by the
contributors listed in the next section. The latest version may be found at
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cognitive_Psychology_and_Cognitive_Neuroscience.
PDF Information & History
This PDF was created on 2007-04-26 based on the 2007-04-25 version of the Cognitive
Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Wikibook. A transparent copy of this document is available at
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience. An OpenDocument Text version of this PDF document and the template from which it was created is available upon
request at Wikibooks:User talk:Hagindaz. A printer-friendly version of this document may be available
at Wikibooks:Image:Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience printable version.pdf.
Chapter 16
16 AUTHORS & IMAGE CREDITS
Authors
Achim, AkumAPRIME, Annschro, Apape, Arothert, ArrowStomper, Asarwary, Aschoeke, Az1568,
Bluebirch, CyrilB, Darklama, Ddeunert, Ekrueger, Ervinn, Evan.Wilson, Eyu100, FlyingGerman,
Hagindaz, Herbys bot, Herbythyme, Hknepper, Hnasir, Hu, Ifranzme, Iroewer, Itiaden, Jbuergle,
Jcunliff, Jgerhard, Jguk, Jkeyser, Kellen, Kkase, Kvoncarl, LanguageGame, Lbartels, Loettl, Lyagoub,
MFJoe, Maebert, Marplogm, Mheimann, MichaelFrey, Mkoguchi, Mstocks, Npraceju, Pbenner,
Pehrenbr, Poogyist, Robert Huber, Rymwoo, Sahab, Smieskes, Soschnei, Sspoede, Swaterka, Tannersf,
Tbittlin, Themsted, Thkruege, Thorben, Timoschm, Tkrieger, Urbane, Vmoenter, Xania, Ykisi
Image Credits
Authors for GFDL-licensed images are listed in image captions. All other images are in the public
domain.
178 | Cognitive Psychology and Neuroscience
GNU Free Documentation License
17 GNU FREE DOCUMENTATION LICENSE
Version 1.2, November 2002
Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
0. PREAMBLE
The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other functional and useful
document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and
redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially. Secondarily, this
License preserves for the author and publisher a way to get credit for their work, while not being
considered responsible for modifications made by others.
This License is a kind of "copyleft", which means that derivative works of the document must
themselves be free in the same sense. It complements the GNU General Public License, which is a
copyleft license designed for free software.
We have designed this License in order to use it for manuals for free software, because free
software needs free documentation: a free program should come with manuals providing the same
freedoms that the software does. But this License is not limited to software manuals; it can be used for
any textual work, regardless of subject matter or whether it is published as a printed book. We
recommend this License principally for works whose purpose is instruction or reference.
1. APPLICABILITY AND DEFINITIONS
This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that contains a notice placed by
the copyright holder saying it can be distributed under the terms of this License. Such a notice grants a
world-wide, royalty-free license, unlimited in duration, to use that work under the conditions stated
herein. The "Document", below, refers to any such manual or work. Any member of the public is a
licensee, and is addressed as "you". You accept the license if you copy, modify or distribute the work
in a way requiring permission under copyright law.
A "Modified Version" of the Document means any work containing the Document or a portion of
it, either copied verbatim, or with modifications and/or translated into another language.
A "Secondary Section" is a named appendix or a front-matter section of the Document that deals
exclusively with the relationship of the publishers