Representing task context: proposals based on a connectionist model of action

Abstract. Representations of task context play a crucial role in shaping human behavior. While the nature of these representations remains poorly understood, existing theories share a number of basic assumptions. One of these is that task representations are discrete, independent, and non-overlapping. We present here an alternative view, according to which task representations are instead viewed as graded, distributed patterns occupying a shared, continuous representational space. In recent work, we have implemented this view in a computational model of routine sequential action. In the present article, we focus specifically on this model's implications for understanding task representation, considering the implications of the account for two influential concepts: (1) cognitive underspecification, the idea that task representations may be imprecise or vague, especially in contexts where errors occur, and (2) information-sharing, the idea that closely related operations rely on common sets of internal representations.

[1]  D. Spalding The Principles of Psychology , 1873, Nature.

[2]  G. Miller,et al.  Plans and the structure of behavior , 1960 .

[3]  A. Battersby Plans and the Structure of Behavior , 1968 .

[4]  J. Shaoul Human Error , 1973, Nature.

[5]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  A framework for representing knowledge , 1974 .

[6]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  A framework for representing knowledge" in the psychology of computer vision , 1975 .

[7]  Daniel G. Bobrow,et al.  Descriptions: An intermediate stage in memory retrieval , 1979, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  J. Reason Actions not as planned : The price of automatisation , 1979 .

[9]  D. Norman Categorization of action slips. , 1981 .

[10]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Simulating a Skilled Typist: A Study of Skilled Cognitive-Motor Performance , 1982, Cogn. Sci..

[11]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  Dynamic memory - a theory of reminding and learning in computers and people , 1983 .

[12]  C SchankRoger,et al.  Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People , 1983 .

[13]  Allen Newell,et al.  SOAR: An Architecture for General Intelligence , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[14]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  SCRIPTS, PLANS, GOALS, AND UNDERSTANDING , 1988 .

[15]  James L. McClelland Explorations In Parallel Distributed Processing , 1988 .

[16]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Sentence comprehension: A parallel distributed processing approach , 1989, Language and Cognitive Processes.

[17]  Michael McCloskey,et al.  Catastrophic Interference in Connectionist Networks: The Sequential Learning Problem , 1989 .

[18]  Chris Mellish,et al.  Current research in natural language generation , 1990 .

[19]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Distributed Representations , 1986, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[20]  Jeffrey L. Elman,et al.  Finding Structure in Time , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[21]  George Houghton,et al.  The problem of serial order: a neural network model of sequence learning and recall , 1990 .

[22]  B. Baars Experimental slips and human error : exploring the architecture of volition , 1992 .

[23]  J. Reason Cognitive Underspecification Its Variety and Consequences , 1992 .

[24]  Mark F. St. John,et al.  The Story Gestalt: A Model of Knowledge-Intensive Processes in Text Comprehension , 1992, Cogn. Sci..

[25]  Yves Chauvin,et al.  Backpropagation: the basic theory , 1995 .

[26]  Ronald J. Williams,et al.  Gradient-based learning algorithms for recurrent networks and their computational complexity , 1995 .

[27]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Why there are complementary learning systems in the hippocampus and neocortex: insights from the successes and failures of connectionist models of learning and memory. , 1995, Psychological review.

[28]  George Houghton,et al.  Parallel Models of Serial Behaviour: Lashley Revisited , 1995 .

[29]  Michael W. Montgomery,et al.  Naturalistic action impairment in closed head injury. , 1998, Neuropsychology.

[30]  C. Lebiere,et al.  The Atomic Components of Thought , 1998 .

[31]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Disordered action schema and action disorganisation syndrome , 1998 .

[32]  T. Rohde LENS : The light , efficient network simulator , 1999 .

[33]  T. Shallice,et al.  CONTENTION SCHEDULING AND THE CONTROL OF ROUTINE ACTIVITIES , 2000, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[34]  M. Page,et al.  Connectionist modelling in psychology: A localist manifesto , 2000, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[35]  D. Plaut,et al.  Doing Without Schema Hierarchies : A Recurrent Connectionist Approach to Routine Sequential Action and Its Pathologies , 2000 .

[36]  D. Plaut,et al.  Doing without schema hierarchies: a recurrent connectionist approach to normal and impaired routine sequential action. , 2004, Psychological review.