SD-squared revisited: Reply to Coltheart, Tree, and Saunders (2010)

, , &
Psychological Review 117 (1):273-281 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1037/a0017641

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Postscript: SD-squared revisited again.Anna M. Woollams, Matthew A. Lambon Ralph, David C. Plaut & Karalyn Patterson - 2010 - Psychological Review 117 (1):282-283.
Postscript: Reading in semantic dementia—A response to Woollams, Lambon Ralph, Plaut, and Patterson (2010).Max Coltheart, Jeremy J. Tree & Steven J. Saunders - 2010 - Psychological Review 117 (1):271-272.
Computational modeling of reading in semantic dementia: Comment on Woollams, Lambon Ralph, Plaut, and Patterson (2007).Max Coltheart, Jeremy J. Tree & Steven J. Saunders - 2010 - Psychological Review 117 (1):256-271.
SD-squared: On the association between semantic dementia and surface dyslexia.Anna M. Woollams, Matthew A. Lambon Ralph, David C. Plaut & Karalyn Patterson - 2007 - Psychological Review 114 (2):316-339.
Beyond Functional Architecture in Cognitive Neuropsychology: A Reply to Coltheart (2010).David C. Plaut & Karalyn Patterson - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (1):12-14.
Saunders and Wallace reply.Simon Saunders & David Wallace - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (3):315-317.
Right-hemisphere reading revisited.Max Coltheart - 1985 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 8 (2):363-365.
Lessons From Cognitive Neuropsychology for Cognitive Science: A Reply to Patterson and Plaut (2009).Max Coltheart - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (1):3-11.
The Canary tree revisited.Tapani Hyttinen & Mika Rautila - 2001 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (4):1677-1694.
Definition 1.1. 1. A tree is a subset T of< such that for all∈ T, if∈< and⊆, then∈ T. 2. If T is a tree and S⊆ T is also a tree, we say that S is a subtree of T. 3. A tree T is bounded if there exists h:→ such that for all∈ T. [REVIEW]Joseph R. Mileti - 2005 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 11 (3).
"Tuskegee Revisited" Revisited.S. M. Reverby - 2002 - Hastings Center Report 32 (2):4.
Carr-Saunders, A. M. & P. A. Wilson, The Professions. [REVIEW]Saunders Saunders - 1933 - Studies in Philosophy and Social Science 2:310.
Brain‐mind and structure‐function relationships: A methodological response to Coltheart.Adina L. Roskies - 2009 - Philosophy of Science 76 (5):927-939.
Ryle Revisited.Guy Douglas & Stewart Saunders - 1998 - The Philosophers' Magazine 2 (2):48-49.
Fetuin ‐ an old friend revisited.W. M. Brown, K. M. Dziegielewska, N. R. Saunders & K. Møsllgård - 1992 - Bioessays 14 (11):749-755.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-06-30

Downloads
19 (#750,145)

6 months
7 (#339,156)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references