7 found
Order:
  1.  71
    Tiago V. Maia & Axel Cleeremans (2005). Consciousness: Converging Insights From Connectionist Modeling and Neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 (8):397-404.
  2.  5
    Tiago V. Maia & James L. McClelland (2005). The Somatic Marker Hypothesis: Still Many Questions but No Answers. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 (4):162-164.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  3.  76
    Axel Cleeremans & Tiago V. Maia (2005). Consciousness: Converging Insights From Connectionist Modeling and Neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 (8):397-404.
    Over the past decade, many findings in cognitive about the contents of consciousness: we will not address neuroscience have resulted in the view that selective what might be called the ‘enabling factors’ for conscious- attention, working memory and cognitive control ness (e.g. appropriate neuromodulation from the brain- stem, etc.). involve competition between widely distributed rep-.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  4.  16
    Tiago V. Maia & James L. McClelland (2012). A Neurocomputational Approach to Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 16 (1):14-15.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Tiago V. Maia & James L. McClelland (2005). The Somatic Marker Hypothesis: Still Many Questions but No Answers: Response to Bechara Et Al. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9 (4):162-164.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  8
    Tiago V. Maia (2009). Fear Conditioning and Social Groups: Statistics, Not Genetics. Cognitive Science 33 (7):1232-1251.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  14
    James L. McClelland, David C. Plaut, Stephen J. Gotts & Tiago V. Maia (2003). Developing a Domain-General Framework for Cognition: What is the Best Approach? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):611-614.
    We share with Anderson & Lebiere (A&L) (and with Newell before them) the goal of developing a domain-general framework for modeling cognition, and we take seriously the issue of evaluation criteria. We advocate a more focused approach than the one reflected in Newell's criteria, based on analysis of failures as well as successes of models brought into close contact with experimental data. A&L attribute the shortcomings of our parallel-distributed processing framework to a failure to acknowledge a symbolic level of thought. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography