Search

In this response, we consider four main issues arising from the commentaries to the target article. These include further details of the theory of interactive specialization, the relationship between neuroconstructivism and selectionism, the implications of neuroconstructivism for the notion of representation, and the role of genetics in theories of development. We conclude by stressing the importance of multidisciplinary approaches in the future study of cognitive development and by identifying the directions in which neuroconstructivism can expand in the Twenty-first Century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroconstructivism: How the Brain Constructs Cognition proposes a unifying framework for the study of cognitive development that brings together (1) constructivism (which views development as the progressive elaboration of increasingly complex structures), (2) cognitive neuroscience (which aims to understand the neural mechanisms underlying behavior), and (3) computational modeling (which proposes formal and explicit specifications of information processing). The guiding principle of our approach is context dependence, within and (in contrast to Marr [1982]) between levels of organization. We propose that three mechanisms guide the emergence of representations: competition, cooperation, and chronotopy; which themselves allow for two central processes: proactivity and progressive specialization. We suggest that the main outcome of development is partial representations, distributed across distinct functional circuits. This framework is derived by examining development at the level of single neurons, brain systems, and whole organisms. We use the terms encellment, embrainment, and embodiment to describe the higher-level contextual influences that act at each of these levels of organization. To illustrate these mechanisms in operation we provide case studies in early visual perception, infant habituation, phonological development, and object representations in infancy. Three further case studies are concerned with interactions between levels of explanation: social development, atypical development and within that, developmental dyslexia. We conclude that cognitive development arises from a dynamic, contextual change in embodied neural structures leading to partial representations across multiple brain regions and timescales, in response to proactively specified physical and social environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on the article of Steven R. Quartz and Terrence J. Sejnowski regarding neural basis of cognitive development and presents the response from the authors. Steps to be taken from neural constructivism to cognitive constructivism; Infant perception and cognition and the initial architecture of constructivist models; Three aspects of neural constructivism.

Responds to comments on the author's article concerning the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Characterization of selectionist development in a two-phased process; Distinction between intrinsically and environmentally regulated growth.

Analyzes the neural mechanisms of cognitive development according to the point of view of constructivists. Relationship between neural growth mechanisms and environmentally derived neural activities; Description of the representational properties of the cortex; Development of constructive learning.

Our commentary focuses on juxtaposing the proposed science of intentional change with facts and concepts pertaining to the level of large populations or changes on a worldwide scale. Although we find a unified evolutionary theory promising, we think that long-term and large-scale, scientifically guided – that is, intentional – social change is not only impossible, but also undesirable. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Recent work in rational probabilistic modeling suggests that a kind of propositional reasoning is ubiquitous in cognition and especially in cognitive development. However, there is no reason to believe that this type of computation is necessarily conscious or resource-intensive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroconstructivism (Mareschal et a!. 2007a) heralds a departure from the standard "associationism" that has dominated the English speaking cognitive and neuroscience community for generations. Its central concept is context dependency: encellment, embrainment, embodiment and ensocioment. This reviewer welcomes the breath of fresh air in overcoming the "deconstructions" of postmodernism. The program is carried out with a carefully selected sample of empirical evidence with an emphasis on development. This review points to some of tile books' strengths and shortcomings, and adds a few observations that early tile program further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroconstructivist modeling can be usefully extended with algorithms that build their own topology and recruit existing knowledge, effectively constructing a hierarchy of network modules. Possible benefits include allowing abilities to emerge naturally, in a way that affords objective study, deeper insights, and more rapid progress, and provides more serious consideration of the implications of constructivism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroconstructivism (Mareschal et al. 2007a) provides a useful framework for how to integrate research from different levels of analysis to model the multidimensional dynamics of development. However, the authors overlook the topic of meaning, a fundamental feature of cognition and subjective experience and also downplay the nonlinear nature of developmental causality. Neuroconstructivism is overly optimistic on the point of how well current computational models can address the challenge of complexity in developmental science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From our deep interest in the neuroconstntctivist framework, we would like to comment on two fundamental aspects of Mareschal et al's work: the role of neuroconstructivism for clinical work with people suffering from developmental disorders; and the relation between the process of progressive specialization and the increasing abstraction of representations in development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroconstructivism is a hybrid of two incompatible philosophical traditions: a radical idealism insisting upon the free activity of the Subject; and a radical materialistic anthropomorphism, which ascribes inherent properties of humans (e.g., the ability to construct) to nonhuman objects or body parts (e.g., the brain). The two traditions can be combined only by obscuring or confusing the basic notions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors of this commentary concur with the viewpoint presented by Mareschal et al. (2007a; 2007b) concerning the relevance of neurological data when theorizing about cognitive development. However, we argue here that Mareschal et al. fail to consider adequately the relevance of reorganizational brain events occurring through adolescence and early adulthood, especially regarding the prefrontal cortex and the ontogeny of executive functioning. In addition, evidence from the lifespan neurodevelopmental literature indicates that increased activity of neural networks may signify less efficient processing. This observation is of potential relevance when considering the neurological changes associated with cognitive development during childhood and adolescence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neuroconstructivism, Vol. 1: How the Brain Constructs Cognition implies that brain functioning depends oil biofeedback and ecological trajectories. Using the building blocks of Boolean algebra known as logic gates and models of distributed control systems, I suggest that levels of regulatory states are responsible for optimal, pathological, and developmental processes. I include the impact of regulatory and nonregulatory functions on structural development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Neurocostructivism aims to illustrate and explain cognitive development in relation to the underlying neural structures, with the help of computational models. This enterprise should be grounded both in the evolutionary and in the developmental perspectives. In both, selection plays a fundamental role in the construction of neural and cognitive structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An attractive feature of Neuroconstructivism, Vol. 1: How the Brain Constructs Cognition is its emphasis on the active role of the individual in neural and behavioural development and the importance of the interplay with the environment. Certain aspects of development are omitted, however, such as specializations for the distinctive ecologies of infancy and childhood and the scaffolding-like features of behaviour seen during development. It was also a pity that so little credit was given to many scientists who have contributed to just those aspects of development on which the authors focus. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Crush makes extensive use of von Holst and Mittelstaedt's (1950) efference copy hypothesis. Although his embellishnitors of the model is admirably more sophisticated than that of its progenitors, 1 argue that it still suffers from the same conceptual limitations as entailed in its original formulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses neurophysiological and psychophysical studies that counteract with the theory of a dorsal and ventral stream for visual processing used in reconciling the constructivist and direct perception theories. Role of motion information for perception and action; Question on the nature of visual information; Parallel processing schemes proposed to account for the complexities of vision.

Presents comments on a proposed framework for thinking about the nature of vision and visual consciousness called sensorimotor contingency theory. Way of explaining visual experience; Reasons for the adoption of constructivist theories of perception; Opinion on failure to address arguments for constructivism.

Comments on the proposal made by Schyns et al for flexible features in categorization in relation to the three areas not explicitly discussed by the authors, namely, connectionist models of categorization, computational learning theory and constructivist theories of the mind. Two divisions of connectionist models; Relevance of computational learning to the theories of the authors.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Significance of developmental psychology in understanding cognitive neuroscience; Failure of the authors to discuss theories of cognitive development.

Opinion. Focuses on the article related to the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Implication of the relationship between the geometry of the dendritic tree and the function of motoneurons; Morphological differences in the brainstem motor column.

Opinion. Focuses on the article related to the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Implications of a correlated neural activity; Description of the concept of selectionism as presented by the authors; Overview of neural constructivism.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Misrepresentation of the selectionist theories; Relevant contributions of the authors; Description of the theory presented by the authors.

Opinion. Focuses on the article related to the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Implication of cognitive modularity; Concerns of the modularity thesis; Possibility of acquiring cognitive modularity without innate predisposition.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Major problem of the constructivist manifesto; Explanation of the development of thalamocortical connectivity; Difficulty of conceptualizing afferent specification by the internal environment.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Classical argument against the constructivist algorithms; Description of the hypothesis phase in the learning paradox; Assertion of the authors' on the power of biological neural network.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Absence of relevant element in the constructivist manifesto; Function of computer models of child development; Description of generative connectionist algorithms.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Overview on the development of dendrites and axons; Implications of increased complexity of representations; Support for a differentiationist rather than a constructivist manifesto.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Review of the authors' constructivist approach; Role of dendritic growth on the emergence and transformation of representations in the cerebral cortex.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Unjustified attacks of the authors on the function of synapse development; Problems with the authors arguments; Negativism over the prospects of understanding the human brain.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Authors' reference to theoretical and connectionist works in psychology literature; Significance of the article in studying the relationship between neuroscience and psychology.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Role of learning in brain development; Reference to Hebbian learning; Main accomplishments of the authors.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Praise for the multilevel style of analysis used by the authors; Three problems involving the axo-dendritic interface; Developmental regulation of convergence ratios.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Difficulty of establishing a non-relationship between development and learning; Overview of the computational learning theory; Social value of the target article.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Disagreement over the authors' point of view; Overview of the selectionist theories of learning; Role of learning in language development.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Authors' misrepresentation of neuronal selectionism; Functions of retrograde neurotrophic factors; Limitations of the article.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Advantage of early learning tasks such as imprinting; Relationship between structural changes and learning; Solution to the problem of the constructivist neural networks.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Overview of the arguments against selectionist models; Two major types of mammalian development and learning process; Explanation of experience-dependent processes.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Summary of the arguments of the authors of the article; Implications of nativist propositions; Influence on language acquisition.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Summary of the arguments of the authors of the article; Result of rejecting extreme nativist propositions; Description of cortical evolution.

Opinion. Focuses on the article related to the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Determination of neural reality; Parameters of central nervous system growth and maturation; Argument on the combination of the constructivist and selectionist processes.

Opinion. Criticizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Discussion of dynamical learning algorithms; Presentation of constructive algorithms; Description of the asymptotic approximation properties of constructive neural networks.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Information on computational neuroscience; Problem over the assertion of the authors on cortical evolution; Implication of the constructionist view on brain development.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Description of neural ensembles as transforming activities; Need to elaborate on second-order learning; Type of mathematics needed in the cortex environment.

Opinion. Scrutinizes the article on the constructivist view on the relationship between cognitive development and neurobiology. Overview of the adaptive resonance theory (ART); Description of cellular activation and learning laws in ART; Occurrence of associative mismatch-based learning.