The following values have no corresponding Zotero field: PB - JSTOR.

A primary criterion on which models of cognition are evaluated is their ability to fit empirical data. To understand the reason why a model yields a good or poor fit, it is necessary to determine the data‐fitting potential (i.e., flexibility) of the model. In the first part of this article, methods for comparing models and studying their flexibility are reviewed, with a focus on parameter space partitioning (PSP), a general‐purpose method for analyzing and comparing all classes of cognitive models. PSP (...) is then demonstrated in the second part of the article in which two connectionist models of speech perception (TRACE and ARTphone) are compared to learn how design differences affect model flexibility. (shrink)

This article describes the Adaptive Control of Thought–Rational (ACT–R) cognitive architecture (Anderson et al., 2004; Anderson & Lebiere, 1998) and its detailed application to the learning of algebraic symbol manipulation. The theory is applied to modeling the data from a study by Qin, Anderson, Silk, Stenger, & Carter (2004) in which children learn to solve linear equations and perfect their skills over a 6‐day period. Functional MRI data show that: (a) a motor region tracks the output of equation solutions, (b) (...) a prefrontal region tracks the retrieval of declarative information, (c) a parietal region tracks the transformation of mental representations of the equation, (d) an anterior cingulate region tracks the setting of goal information to control the information flow, and (e) a caudate region tracks the firing of productions in the ACT–R model. The article concludes with an architectural comparison of the competence children display in this task and the competence that monkeys have shown in tasks that require manipulations of sequences of elements. (shrink)

Two tasks where failures of cognitive control are especially prevalent are task switching and spatial Simon task paradigms. Both tasks require considerable strategic control for the participant to avoid the costs associated with switching tasks (task-switching paradigm) and to minimize the influence of spatial location (Simon task). In the current study, we assessed whether the use of a self-regulatory strategy known as “implementation intentions” would have any beneficial effects on performance in each of these task domains. Forming an implementation intention (...) (i.e., an if–then plan) is a self- regulatory strategy in which a mental link is created between a pre-specified future cue and a desired goal-directed response, resulting in facilitated goal attainment (Gollwitzer in European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 141–185, 1993, American Psychologist, 54, 493–503, 1999). In Experiment 1, forming implementation intentions in the context of a taskswitching paradigm led to a reduction in switch costs. In Experiment 2, forming implementation intentions reduced the effects of spatial location in a Simon task for the stimulus specified in the implementation intention. Results supported the prediction that the need for high levels of cognitive control can be alleviated to some degree by making if–then plans that specify how one responds to that critical stimuli. (shrink)