Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):587-601 (2003)

Abstract
Newell proposed that cognitive theories be developed in an effort to satisfy multiple criteria and to avoid theoretical myopia. He provided two overlapping lists of 13 criteria that the human cognitive architecture would have to satisfy in order to be functional. We have distilled these into 12 criteria: flexible behavior, real-time performance, adaptive behavior, vast knowledge base, dynamic behavior, knowledge integration, natural language, learning, development, evolution, and brain realization. There would be greater theoretical progress if we evaluated theories by a broad set of criteria such as these and attended to the weaknesses such evaluations revealed. To illustrate how theories can be evaluated we apply these criteria to both classical connectionism and the ACT-R theory. The strengths of classical connectionism on this test derive from its intense effort in addressing empirical phenomena in such domains as language and cognitive development. Its weaknesses derive from its failure to acknowledge a symbolic level to thought. In contrast, ACT-R includes both symbolic and subsymbolic components. The strengths of the ACT-R theory derive from its tight integration of the symbolic component with the subsymbolic component. Its weaknesses largely derive from its failure, as yet, to adequately engage in intensive analyses of issues related to certain criteria on Newell's list. Key Words: cognitive architecture; connectionism; hybrid systems; language; learning; symbolic systems
Keywords cognitive architecture   connectionism   hybrid systems   language   learning   symbolic systems
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0140525x0300013x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,979
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Book: Cognitive Design for Artificial Minds.Antonio Lieto - 2021 - London, UK: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Ltd.
The Rules Versus Similarity Distinction.Emmanuel M. Pothos - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):1-14.

View all 29 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Hardest Test for a Theory of Cognition: The Input Test.Asim Roy - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):618-619.
Rethinking Learning and Development in the Newell Test.Sylvain Sirois - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):619-620.
Optimism for the Future of Unified Theories.John R. Anderson & Christian Lebiere - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):628-633.
Newell's List.Joseph Agassi - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):601-602.
Poppering the Newell Test.Niels A. Taatgen - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):621-622.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
74 ( #155,756 of 2,504,848 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #417,030 of 2,504,848 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes