Reply to the ability of the sweeping model to explain human attention
Journal of Mind and Behavior 14 (3):215-222 (1993)
This is a reply to Weinfurt's article examining the Sweeping Model. Overall, our positions are not as incompatible as they may seem, although I feel that his conclusion, that the Sweeping Model cannot explain human attention, does not follow from his comments. I will proceed through his article and clarify issues as they arise. Our difference of opinion may result from differing goals, with Weinfurt being concerned with more abstract aspects of cognition, and myself with basic perception and how it may be achieved before proceeding to the more abstract
|Keywords||Artificial Intelligence Cognition Model Science Weinfurt, K|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Thomas F. Gordon, the Pleadings Game – an Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice.Arno R. Lodder - 2000 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3):255-264.
A Strongly Embodied Approach to Machine Consciousness.Owen Holland - 2007 - Journal of Consciousness Studies 14 (7):97-110.
A Conceptual and Computational Model of Moral Decision Making in Human and Artificial Agents.Wendell Wallach, Stan Franklin & Colin Allen - 2010 - Topics in Cognitive Science 2 (3):454-485.
Artificial Intelligence In Psychology: Interdisciplinary Essays.Margaret A. Boden - 1989 - Cambridge: MIT Press.
High-Level Perception, Representation, and Analogy:A Critique of Artificial Intelligence Methodology.David J. Chalmers, Robert M. French & Douglas R. Hofstadter - 1992 - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intellige 4 (3):185 - 211.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?