David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):842-843 (1998)
Measurements of the dimensionality of chaotic attractors obtained on behavioral data represent the task complexity and also could be hypothesized to reflect the number of synchronized neural groups involved in the generation of the data. The changes in dimensionality for different experimental conditions suggest that limited processing capacity, task complexity, demand, and synchrony in neural firing might be closely related.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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
Ichiro Tsuda (2001). The Plausibility of a Chaotic Brain Theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):829-840.
Richard A. Heath & Brett K. Hayes (1998). Why is Capacity Limited? Missing Dynamics and Developmental Controversies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):839-840.
Juan Pascual-Leone (1998). To Appraise Developmental Difficulty or Mental Demand, Relational Complexity is Not Enough. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):843-844.
Daniel B. Berch & Elizabeth J. Foley (1998). Processing Demands Associated with Relational Complexity: Testing Predictions with Dual-Task Methodologies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):832-833.
Nelson Cowan (1998). What is More Explanatory, Processing Capacity or Processing Speed? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):835-836.
Douglas Frye & Philip David Zelazo (1998). Complexity: From Formal Analysis to Final Action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):836-837.
Graeme S. Halford, William H. Wilson & Steven Phillips (1998). Processing Capacity Defined by Relational Complexity: Implications for Comparative, Developmental, and Cognitive Psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):803-831.
Damian P. Birney & Graeme S. Halford (2002). Cognitive Complexity of Suppositional Reasoning: An Application of the Relational Complexity Metric to the Knight-Knave Task. Thinking and Reasoning 8 (2):109 – 134.
Graeme S. Halford, William H. Wilson & Steven Phillips (1998). Relational Complexity Metric is Effective When Assessments Are Based on Actual Cognitive Processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):848-860.
John R. Anderson, Christian Lebiere, Marsha Lovett & Lynne Reder (1998). ACT-R: A Higher-Level Account of Processing Capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):831-832.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #583,552 of 1,781,383 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #295,020 of 1,781,383 )
How can I increase my downloads?