Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):759-760 (2002)

Abstract
Thomas & Karmiloff- Smith show that the assumption of residual normality does not hold in connectionist simulations, and argue that RN has been inappropriately applied to childhood disorders. We agree. However, we suggest that the RN hypothesis may never have been fully viable, either empirically or computationally
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0140525x02310136
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 72,607
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Residual Normality: Friend or Foe?Michael Thomas & Annette Karmiloff-Smith - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):772-780.
The Beauty of Models for Developmental Disorders.J. Briscoe - 2002 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):750-752.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
31 ( #372,911 of 2,533,648 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #389,210 of 2,533,648 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes