Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):199-200 (2004)
|Abstract||Pickering & Garrod (P&G) deserve appreciation for their cogent argument that dialogue merits greater scientific consideration. Current models make little contact with behaviors of dialogue, motivating the interactive alignment theory. However, the theory is not truly “mechanistic.” A full account requires both representations and processes bringing those representations into harmony. We suggest that Grossberg's (1980) adaptive resonance theory may naturally conform to the principles of dialogue.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Dale Hample, Bing Han & David Payne (2010). The Aggressiveness of Playful Arguments. Argumentation 24 (4):405-421.
Tang Yijie & Yan Xin (2008). The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477 - 501.
Hadas Shintel & Howard C. Nusbaum (2004). Dialogue Processing: Automatic Alignment or Controlled Understanding? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):210-211.
Allan Mazur (2004). Beyond Linguistic Alignment. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):205-206.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Martin J. Pickering & Simon Garrod (2004). The Interactive-Alignment Model: Developments and Refinements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):212-225.
Paul A. Luce, Stephen D. Goldinger & Michael S. Vitevitch (2000). It's Good . . . But is It ART? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (3):336-336.
Martin J. Pickering & Simon Garrod (2004). Toward a Mechanistic Psychology of Dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):169-190.
Holly P. Branigan (2004). Full Alignment of Some but Not All Representations in Dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):191-192.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #180,404 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?