Cooper Richard P, Shallice Tim
School of Psychology, Birkbeck, University of London, London, England.
Psychol Rev. 2006 Oct;113(4):887-916; discussion 917-31. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.4.887.
Traditional accounts of sequential behavior assume that schemas and goals play a causal role in the control of behavior. In contrast, M. Botvinick and D. C. Plaut argued that, at least in routine behavior, schemas and goals are epiphenomenal. The authors evaluate the Botvinick and Plaut account by contrasting the simple recurrent network model of Botvinick and Plaut with their own more traditional hierarchically structured interactive activation model (R. P. Cooper & T. Shallice, 2000). The authors present a range of arguments and additional simulations that demonstrate theoretical and empirical difficulties for both Botvinick and Plaut's model and their theoretical position. The authors conclude that explicit hierarchically organized and causally efficacious schema and goal representations are required to provide an adequate account of the flexibility of sequential behavior.
关于序列行为的传统观点认为，图式和目标在行为控制中起因果作用。相比之下，M. 博特温尼克和D. C. 普劳特认为，至少在常规行为中，图式和目标是副现象。作者通过将博特温尼克和普劳特的简单循环网络模型与他们自己更传统的层次结构交互式激活模型（R. P. 库珀和T. 沙利斯，2000）进行对比，来评估博特温尼克和普劳特的观点。作者提出了一系列论据和额外的模拟，这些论据和模拟证明了博特温尼克和普劳特的模型及其理论立场在理论和实证方面存在的困难。作者得出结论，需要明确的层次组织且具有因果效力的图式和目标表征，才能充分解释序列行为的灵活性。
