Acerca del carácter representacional de la mente. La mente representacional

  1. Zumalabe Makirriain, José María
Revista:
Psychology, Society & Education

ISSN: 1989-709X,  2171-2085

Año de publicación: 2014

Volumen: 6

Número: 2

Páginas: 125-144

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.25115/PSYE.V6I2.513 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Psychology, Society & Education

Resumen

Desde las ciencias cognitivas se entiende el pensamiento en términos de estructuras de representaciones mentales sobre las que operan procesos computacionales. En el modelo representacional-computacional de la mente se recurre a una compleja analogía triádica que vincula mente, cerebro y ordenadores. La mayoría de estos modelos son simbólicos, aunque también existen modelos representacionales no simbólicos (conexionismo) y modelos cognitivos no representacionales de la mente. El análisis de los diferentes enfoques cognitivos sobre las representaciones y los procesos mentales en el marco de la ciencia cognitiva y de sus ventajas y limitaciones revela que se trata de enfoques que no tienen por qué ser excluyentes entre sí y que en muchos de los casos se complementan, aunque también se constata la ausencia de una teoría unificada al respecto. Tras considerar los puntos débiles tanto del modelo simbólico computacional clásico como del conexionismo, reconociendo los avances significativos propiciados por ambos en el estudio de la mente, se concluye que no existe todavía ningún modelo computacional con capacidad representacional para abarcar todo el pensamiento humano.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Amsel, A. (1989). Behaviorism, neobehaviorism, and cognitivism in learning theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Anderson, J. R., Qin, Y., Stenger, V. A., y Carter, C. S. (2004). The relationship of three cortical regions to an information-processing model. Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 637-653.
  • Ashby, F. G. y Waldron, E. M. (2000). The neuropsychological bases of category learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(1), 10-14.
  • Ballesteros, S. (1992). La representación del conocimiento en los sistemas conexionistas. Psicothema, 4(2), 343-354.
  • Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition, 11(3), 211-227.
  • Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K. y Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual Knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 84-91.
  • Bates, E. A. y Elman, J. L. (2002). Connectionism and the study of change. En M. H. Johnson, Y., Munakata y R. O. Gilmore (eds.), Brain development and cognition (pp.420-440). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Boroojerdi, B., Phipps, M., Kopylev, L., Wharton, C. M., Cohen, L. G. y Grafman, J. (2001). Enhancing analogic reasoning with RTMS over the left prefrontal cortex. Neurology, 56, 526-528.
  • Broadbent, D. E. (1985). A question of levels: Comments on McClelland and Rumelhart. Journal of Experimental Pschology: General, 114, 189-192.
  • Chomsky, N. (1972/1986). El lenguaje y el entendimiento. Barcelona: Seix Barral.
  • Chomsky, N. (1988). Lenguage and problems of knowledge: The Managua lectures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Chomsky, N. (2002/2003). Sobre la naturaleza del lenguaje. Madrid: Cambridge University Press.
  • Christoff, K., Pabhakaran, V., Dorfman, J., Zhao, Z., Kroger, J. K., Holyoak, K. J. y Gabrieli, J. D. K. (2001). Rostrolateral prefrontal cortex involvement in relational integration during reasoning. NeuroImage, 14(5), 1136-1149.
  • Churchland, P. S. y Sejnowski, T. (1992). The computational brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Clark, A. (1998). Embodied, situated, and distributed cognition. En W. Bechtel and G. Graham (eds.), A companion to cognitive science (pp. 506-517). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
  • Collins, A. M. y Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
  • Cummins, R (1983). The nature of psychological explanation. Cambridge,Mass.: MIT Press.
  • Dehaene, S., Spelke, E., Pinel, P., Stanescu, R. y Tsivkin, S. (1999). Sources of mathematical thinking: Behavioral and brain-imaging evidence. Science, 284(5416), 970-974.
  • Eliasmith, C. y Thagard, P. (2001). Integrating structure and meaning: A distributed model of analogical mapping. Cognitive Science, 25(2), 245-286.
  • Fodor, J. A. (1985). El lenguaje del pensamiento. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Fodor, J. A. (1988). Psychosemantics. The Problem of meaning in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • Fodor, J. A. y Pylyshyn, Z. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical análisis. Cognition, 28, 3-71.
  • Funt, B. (1980). Problem solving with diagrammatic representations. Artificial Intelligence, 13(3), 201-230.
  • Holland, J. H., Holyoak, K. J., Nisbett, R. E. y Thagard, P. R. (1986). Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Holyoak, K. J. y Thagard, P. R. (1995). Mental leaps: Analogy in creative
  • thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
  • Hummel, J. E. y Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Distributed representations of structure: A theory of analogical acces and mapping. Psychological Review, 104(3), 427-466.
  • Hummel, J. E. y Holyoak, K. J. (2003). A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization. Psychological Review, 110(2), 220-264.
  • Johnson, M. y Lakoff, G. (2002). Why cognitive linguistics requires embodied realism. Cognitive Linguistics, 13(3), 245-263.
  • Keil, F. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
  • Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163-182.
  • Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehensión: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kolodner, J. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
  • Kosslyn, S. M. (1980). Image and mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Kosslyn, S. M. y Shwartz, S. P. (1977). A simulation of visual imagery. Cognitive Science, 1, 265-295.
  • Kosslyn, S. M. y Koenig, O (1992). Wet mind: The new cognitive neuroscience. Nueva York: Free Press.
  • Kosslyn, S. M., Ganis, G. y Thompson, W. L. (2001). Neural foundations of imagery. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 635-642.
  • Kroger, J. K., Sabb, F. W., Fales, C. L., Bookheimer, S. Y., Cohen, M. S. y Holyoak, K. J. (2002). Recruitment in anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in human reasoning: A parametric study of relational complexity. Cerebral Cortex, 12(5), 477-485.
  • Kunda, Z. y Thagard, P. (1996). Forming impressions from stereotypes, traits, and behaviors: A parallel-constrained-satisfaction theory. Psychological Review, 103(2), 284-308.
  • Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  • Lakoff, G. (1994). What is metaphor? En J. A. Barnden y K. J. Holyoak (eds.), Advances in connectionist and neural computation theory. Vol. 3, Analogy, metaphor, and reminding (pp. 203-257). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  • Lakoff, G. y Johnson, M. (1986). Metáforas de la vida cotidiana. Madrid: Cátedra.
  • Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  • Larkin, J. H. y Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65-100.
  • Leake, D. B. (ed.) (1996). Case-based reasoning: Experiences. Lessons, and future directions. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/MIT Press.
  • Marslen-Wilson, W. (1989). Access and integration: Projecting sound onto meaning. En W. Marslen-Wilson (ed.), Lexical representation and process
  • McCawley, J. D. (1993). Everything that linguist have always wanted to know about logic-but were ashamed to ask. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • McClelland, J. L. y Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part. 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88(5), 375-407.
  • McClelland, J. L. y Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18(1), 1-86.
  • McClelland, J. L. y Patterson, K. (2002). Rules of connections in past-tense inflections: What does the evidence rule out? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(11), 465-472.
  • McWhinney, B. y Leinbach, J. (1991). Implementations are not conceptualizations: Revising the verb model. Cognition, 40(1), 121-157.
  • Medina, N. (2008). La ciencia cognitiva y el estudio de la mente. Revista de Investigación en Psicología, 11(1), 183-198.
  • Miller, G. A. (1991). The science of words. Nueva York: Scientific American Library.
  • Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. En P. H. Winston (ed.), The psychology of computer vision (pp. 211-277). Nueva York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Murphy, G. L. (2002). The big book of concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Murphy, G. L. y Medin, D. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92(3), 289-316.
  • Newell, A. (1973). Production systems: Models of control structures. En W. G. Chase (ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 463-526). New York: Academic Press.
  • Newell, A. (1990). Unified theories of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Newell, A., Shaw, J. C. y Simon, H. A. (1958). Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychological Review, 65(3), 151-166.
  • Newell, A. y Simon, H. A. (1972), Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • O`Reilly, R. C. y Munakata, Y. (2000). Computacional explorations in cognitive neuroscience: Understanding the mind by simulating the brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes. Nueva York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
  • Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Palmer, S. E. y Kimchi, R. (1986). The information processing approach to cognition. En T. J. Knapp y L. C. Robertson (eds.), Approaches to cognition: Contrasts and controversies (pp. 37-77). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Papert, S. (1988). One AI or many? Daedalus, 117, 1-14.
  • Pinker, S. (2007). Cómo funciona la mente. Barcelona: Destino.
  • Pinker, S. y Prince, A. (1988). On language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition, 28(1-2), 73-193.
  • Pinker, S. y Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(11), 456-464.
  • Pylyshyn, Z. (1984). Computation and cognition: Toward a foundation for cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Pylyshyn, Z. (2002). Mental imagery: In search of a theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(2), 157-237.
  • Rosenbloom, P. S., Laird, J. E. y Newell, A. (eds.) (1993). The Soar papers: Research on integrated intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Rumelhart, D. E. (1989). The architecture of mind: A connectionist approach. En M. I. Posner (ed.), The architecture of cognition (pp. 133-156). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Rumelhart, D., McClelland, J. L. and PDP Research Group (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, Vol.1: Foundation. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
  • Schacter, D. L., Cooper, L. A. y Delaney, S. M. (1990). Implicit memory for unfamiliar objects depends on access to structural descriptions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 5-24.
  • Seidenberg, M. S. y McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96(4), 523-568.
  • Shepard, R. N. y Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701-703.
  • Shepard, R. N. y Cooper, L. A. (1982). Mental images and their transformations. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Smolensky, P. (1988). On the proper treatment of connectionism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 1-74.
  • Smythe, W. E. (1988). The semantic distinction between propositional and skillful knowing. Journal of Intelligent Systems, 1(2), 135-184).
  • Smythe, W. E. (1989). The case for cognitive conservatism: A critique of Dan Lloyd´s approach to mental representation. Behaviorism, 17(1), 63-73.
  • Spellman, B. A. y Holyoak, K. J. (1993). An inhibitory mechanism for goaldirected analogical mapping. En Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp.947-952), Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • St. John, M. F. (1992). The story gestalt: A model of knowledge-intensive processes in text comprehension. Cognitive Science, 16(2), 271-306.
  • Stabler, E. P. (1992). The logical approach to syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Thagard, P. (2008). La mente. Introducción a las ciencias cognitivas. : Buenos Aires: Katz Editores.
  • Touretzky, . y Hinton, G. (1988). A distributed connectionist production system. Cognitive Science, 12(3), 423-466.
  • Vega de, M. (1998). La psicología cognitiva: ensayo sobre un paradigma en transformación. Anuario de Psicología, 29(2), 21-44.
  • Wharton, C. M., Holyoak, K. J., Downing, P. E., Lange, T. E., Wickens, T. D. y Melz, E. R. (1994). Below the surface: Analogical similarity and retrieval competition in reminding. Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 64-101.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet