Automaticity and inhibition in action planning

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):44-45 (2004)
Abstract
We question the generalizability of Glover's model because it fails to distinguish between different forms of planning. The highly controlled experimental situations on which this model is based, do not reflect some important factors that contribute to planning. We discuss several classes of action that seem to imply distinct planning mechanisms, questioning Glover's postulation of a single “planning system.”.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,561
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Scott Glover (2004). Planning and Control in Action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):57-69.
Melvyn A. Goodale & A. David Milner (2004). Plans for Action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):37-40.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

3 ( #288,716 of 1,098,129 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #283,807 of 1,098,129 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.