Suppr超能文献

解决冲突:对马丁和程(2006年)的回应。

Resolving conflict: a response to Martin and Cheng (2006).

作者信息

Thompson-Schill Sharon L, Botvinick Matthew M

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, 3720 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6241, USA.

出版信息

Psychon Bull Rev. 2006 Jun;13(3):402-8; discussion 409-11. doi: 10.3758/bf03193860.

Abstract

Martin and Cheng (2006) report the results of an experiment aimed at disentangling the effects of association strength from those of competition on performance on a verb generation task. Their experiment is situated at the center of a putative debate regarding the function of the left inferior frontal gyrus in language processing (see, e.g., Wagner, Pard-Blagoev, Clark, and Poldrack, 2001). Following in this tradition, Martin and Cheng purport to contrast two processes--selection between competing representations and controlled retrieval of weak associates--that we argue can be reduced to the same mechanism. We contend that the distinction between competition and association strength is a false dichotomy, and we attempt to recast this discussion within a Bayesian framework in an attempt to guide research in this area in a more fruitful direction.

摘要

马丁和程(2006年)报告了一项实验的结果,该实验旨在区分联想强度和竞争对动词生成任务表现的影响。他们的实验处于关于左下额叶回在语言处理中的功能的一场假定辩论的核心位置(例如,见瓦格纳、帕德 - 布拉戈耶夫、克拉克和波尔德拉克,2001年)。遵循这一传统,马丁和程旨在对比两个过程——在相互竞争的表征之间进行选择以及对弱联想进行控制性检索——而我们认为这两个过程可以归结为同一机制。我们认为竞争和联想强度之间的区分是一种错误的二分法,并且我们试图在贝叶斯框架内重新阐述这一讨论,以期将该领域的研究导向一个更富有成果的方向。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验