Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):619-620 (2003)
|Abstract||The Newell Test is an ambitious and promising project, but not without pitfalls. Some of the current criteria are not theoretically neutral, whereas others are unhelpful. To improve the test, the learning and development criteria are reviewed and revised, which suggests adding a maturation criterion as well. Such changes should make the Newell Test more general and useful.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Tang Yijie & Yan Xin (2008). The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477 - 501.
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
H. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
Paul F. M. J. Verschure (2003). Real-World Behavior as a Constraint on the Cognitive Architecture: Comparing ACT-R and DAC in the Newell Test. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):624-626.
Asim Roy (2003). The Hardest Test for a Theory of Cognition: The Input Test. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):618-619.
Niels A. Taatgen (2003). Poppering the Newell Test. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):621-622.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #274,830 of 549,093 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?