Cognitive Development for Connectionists

[Annette Karmiloff-Smith]

Below are details of two articles and a book which may be
of interest to connectionists:

A.Karmiloff-Smith (1992), Connection Science, Vo.4, Nos. 3 & 4, 253-
269.
NATURE, NURTURE ANDS PDP: Preposterous Developmental Postulates?
(N.B. the question mark - I end on: Promising Developmental
Postulates!)

Abstract:  In this article I discuss the nature/nurture debate in terms
of evidence and theorizing from the field of cognitive development, and
pinpoint various problems where the Connectionist framework needs to
be further explored from this perspective.  Evidence from normal and
abnormal developmental phenotypes points to some domain-specific
constraints on early learning.  Yet, by invoking the dynamics of
epigenesis, I avoid recourse to a strong Nativist stance and remain
within the general spirit of Connectionism.
_____________________________________________________________

A. Karmiloff-Smith (1992)  Technical Report TR.PDP.CNS.92.7, Carnegie
Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
ABNORMAL PHENOTYPES AND THE CHALLENGES THEY POSE TO
CONNECTIONIST MODELS OF DEVELOPMENT

Abstract:  The comparison of different abnormal phenotypes (e.g.
Williams syndrome, Down syndrome, autism, hydrocephalus with
associated myelomeningocele) raises a number of questions about
domain-general versus domain-specific processes and suggests that
development stems from domain-specific predispositions which
channel infantsU attention  to proprietary inputs.  This is not to be
confused with a strong Nativist position.  Genetically fully specified
modules are not the starting point of development.  Rather, a process of
gradual modularization builds on skeletal domain-specific
predispositions (architectural and/or representational) which give the
normal infant a small but significant head-start. It is argued that Down
syndrome infants may lack these head-starts, whereas individuals with
Williams syndrome, autism and hydrocephalus with associated
myelomeningocele have a head-start in selected domains only, leading
to different cognitive profiles despite equivalent input.  Stress is placed
on the importance of exploring a developing system, rather than a
lesioned adult system. The position developed in the paper not only
contrasts with the strong Nativist stance, but also with the view that
domain-general processes are simply applied to whatever inputs the
child encounters. The comparison of different phenotypical outcomes is
shown to pose interesting challenges to connectionist simulations of
development.
______________________________________________________________

A.Karmiloff-Smith (1992) BEYOND MODULARITY: A DEVELOPMENTAL
PERSPECTIVE ON COGNITIVE SCIENCE.  MIT Press/Bradford Books.

A book intended to excite connectionists and other non-
developmentalists about the essential role that a developmental
perspective has in understanding the special nature of human cognition
compared to other species.
Contents:
1. Taking development seriously
2. The child as a linguist
3. The child as a physicist
4. The child as a mathematician
5. The child as a psychologist
6. The child as a notator
7. Nativism, domain specificity and PiagetUs constructivism
8. Modelling development: representational redescription
    and connectionism
9. Concluding speculations

Reprints of articles obtainable from:
Annette Karmiloff-Smith
Medical Research Council
Cognitive Development Unit
London
WC1H 0AH.
U.K.