A computational model of routine procedural memory
Cooper and Shallice (2000) implemented a computational version of the Norman and Shallice's (1986) Contention Scheduling Model (CSM). The CSM is a hierarchically organized network of action schemas and goals. Botvinick and Plaut (2004) instead took a connectionist approach to modeling routine p...
Format: | Others |
---|---|
Language: | English |
Published: |
2011
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1911/61904 |
id |
ndltd-RICE-oai-scholarship.rice.edu-1911-61904 |
---|---|
record_format |
oai_dc |
spelling |
ndltd-RICE-oai-scholarship.rice.edu-1911-619042013-05-01T03:46:28ZA computational model of routine procedural memoryPsychologyExperimentalPsychologyCognitiveCooper and Shallice (2000) implemented a computational version of the Norman and Shallice's (1986) Contention Scheduling Model (CSM). The CSM is a hierarchically organized network of action schemas and goals. Botvinick and Plaut (2004) instead took a connectionist approach to modeling routine procedural behavior. They argued in favor of holistic, distributed representation of learned step co-occurrence associations. Two experiments found that people can adapt routine procedural behavior to changing circumstances quite readily and that other factors besides statistical co-occurrence can have influence on action selection. A CSM-inspired ACT-R model of the two experiments is the first to postdict differential error rates across multiple between-subjects conditions and trial types. Results from the behavioral and modeling studies favor a CSM-like theory of human routine procedural memory that uses discrete, hierarchically-organized goal and action representations that are adaptable to new but similar procedures.2011-07-25T01:39:18Z2011-07-25T01:39:18Z2009ThesisTextapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/1911/61904eng |
collection |
NDLTD |
language |
English |
format |
Others
|
sources |
NDLTD |
topic |
Psychology Experimental Psychology Cognitive |
spellingShingle |
Psychology Experimental Psychology Cognitive A computational model of routine procedural memory |
description |
Cooper and Shallice (2000) implemented a computational version of the Norman and Shallice's (1986) Contention Scheduling Model (CSM). The CSM is a hierarchically organized network of action schemas and goals. Botvinick and Plaut (2004) instead took a connectionist approach to modeling routine procedural behavior. They argued in favor of holistic, distributed representation of learned step co-occurrence associations. Two experiments found that people can adapt routine procedural behavior to changing circumstances quite readily and that other factors besides statistical co-occurrence can have influence on action selection. A CSM-inspired ACT-R model of the two experiments is the first to postdict differential error rates across multiple between-subjects conditions and trial types. Results from the behavioral and modeling studies favor a CSM-like theory of human routine procedural memory that uses discrete, hierarchically-organized goal and action representations that are adaptable to new but similar procedures. |
title |
A computational model of routine procedural memory |
title_short |
A computational model of routine procedural memory |
title_full |
A computational model of routine procedural memory |
title_fullStr |
A computational model of routine procedural memory |
title_full_unstemmed |
A computational model of routine procedural memory |
title_sort |
computational model of routine procedural memory |
publishDate |
2011 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/1911/61904 |
_version_ |
1716584818368577536 |