Plaut D C
Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890, USA.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 1995 Apr;17(2):291-321. doi: 10.1080/01688639508405124.
Many theorists assume that the cognitive system is composed of a collection of encapsulated processing components or modules, each dedicated to performing a particular cognitive function. On this view, selective impairments of cognitive tasks following brain damage, as evidenced by double dissociations, are naturally interpreted in terms of the loss of particular processing components. By contrast, the current investigation examines in detail a double dissociation between concrete and abstract work reading after damage to a connectionist network that pronounces words via meaning and yet has no separable components (Plaut & Shallice, 1993). The functional specialization in the network that gives rise to the double dissociation is not transparently related to the network's structure, as modular theories assume. Furthermore, a consideration of the distribution of effects across quantitatively equivalent individual lesions in the network raises specific concerns about the interpretation of single-case studies. The findings underscore the necessity of relating neuropsychological data to cognitive theories in the context of specific computational assumptions about how the cognitive system operates normally and after damage.
许多理论家认为，认知系统是由一组封装的处理组件或模块组成的，每个组件或模块都专门用于执行特定的认知功能。根据这一观点，脑损伤后认知任务的选择性损伤，如双重解离所证明的，自然会被解释为特定处理组件的丧失。相比之下，当前的研究详细考察了一个通过意义发音但没有可分离组件的联结主义网络受损后，具体阅读和抽象阅读之间的双重解离（普劳特和沙利斯，1993）。与模块化理论所假设的不同，网络中产生双重解离的功能特化与网络结构并没有明显的关联。此外，考虑网络中数量相等的个体损伤所产生的效应分布，会引发对单病例研究解释的具体担忧。这些发现强调了在关于认知系统正常运作及受损后如何运作的特定计算假设背景下，将神经心理学数据与认知理论联系起来的必要性。
