Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T17:20:11.232Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Models in cognitive psychology: contrast and constraint

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2011

Herbert R. Otto
Herbert R. Otto
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, Plymouth State College, University System of New Hampshire, Plymouth N.H. 03264
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Continuing Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , September 1979 , pp. 485 - 486
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Domotor, Z. (1978) AI: model-theoretic aspects. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1):104–5. [HRO]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugeland, J. (1978) The nature and plausibility of cognitivism. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(2):215–60. [HRO]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. (1961) An enquiry concerning human understanding. Section IV, Part I. New York: Dolphin edition, Doubleday. [HRO]Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1956) Critique of pure reason. Translated by Smith, Norman Kemp. New York: Macmillan & Co. Ltd. [HRO]Google Scholar
Plato. (1937) Phaedo. In The dialogues of Plato, translated by Jowett, B.. New York: Random House. [HRO]Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1978a) Computational models and empirical constraints. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1 (1):93–127. [HRO]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1978b) The A.I. debate: generality, goals and methodological parochialism. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1(1):121–27. [HRO]CrossRefGoogle Scholar