Automaticity and inhibition in action planning

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):44-45 (2004)
We question the generalizability of Glover's model because it fails to distinguish between different forms of planning. The highly controlled experimental situations on which this model is based, do not reflect some important factors that contribute to planning. We discuss several classes of action that seem to imply distinct planning mechanisms, questioning Glover's postulation of a single “planning system.”.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0140525X04390023
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,433
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Scott Glover (2004). Planning and Control in Action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):57-69.
Melvyn A. Goodale & A. David Milner (2004). Plans for Action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (1):37-40.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

10 ( #409,010 of 1,925,039 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

4 ( #212,000 of 1,925,039 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.