harnad@seismo.CSS.GOV@mind.UUCP (01/07/87)
Subject: Anderson on algorithm/implementation: BBS Call for Commentators Keywords: cognitive science, instructional science, AI, connectionism Organization: Cognitive Science, Princeton University The following is the abstract of a forthcoming article on which BBS [Behavioral and Brain Sciences -- An international, interdisciplinary Journal of Open Peer Commentary, published by Cambridge University Press] invites self-nominations by potential commentators. (Please note that the editorial office must exercise selectivity among the nominations received so as to ensure a strong and balanced cross-specialty spectrum of eligible commentators. The procedure is explained after the abstract.) ----- METHODOLOGIES FOR STUDYING HUMAN KNOWLEDGE John R. Anderson Psychology Department Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh PA 15213 ABSTRACT The appropriate methodology for psychological research depends on whether one is studying algorithms or their implementation. Mental algorithms are abstract specifications of the steps taken by procedures that run in the mind. Implementational issues concern factors that determine the speed and reliability with which these procedures run. Issues at the algorithmic level can only be explored by studying across-task variation. This contrasts with psychology's dominant methodology of looking for within-task generalities, which is only appropriate for studying implementational issues. The implementation/algorithm distinction is related to a number of other "levels" proposed in cognitive science. Its realization in the ACT (Anderson 1973) theory of cognition is discussed. Research at the algorithmic level is more promising because it is hard to make further fundamental scientific progress at the implementational level with the methodologies available at this level. Protocol data, which are only appropriate for algorithm-level theories, provide a richer data source than data available at the implementational level. Research at the algorithmic level will also yield more insight into fundamental properties of human knowledge because the significant learning transitions are defined at this level. The best way to study the algorithmic level is by pedagogical experiments that manipulate instructional experience and look for differential learning outcomes. This is because they provide control and prediction in realistically complex learning situations. The intelligent tutoring paradigm provides a particularly fruitful way to implement such experiments. In addition to these major points, the implications of this analysis are developed for the issue of modularity of mind, the status of language, research on human-computer interaction, and connectionist models. ----- This is an experiment in using the Net to find eligible commentators for articles in the Behavioral and Brain Sciences (BBS), an international, interdisciplinary journal of "open peer commentary," published by Cambridge University Press, with its editorial office in Princeton NJ. The journal publishes important and controversial interdisciplinary articles in psychology, neuroscience, behavioral biology, cognitive science, artificial intelligence, linguistics and philosophy. Articles are rigorously refereed and, if accepted, are circulated to a large number of potential commentators around the world in the various specialties on which the article impinges. Their 1000-word commentaries are then co-published with the target article as well as the author's response to each. The commentaries consist of analyses, elaborations, complementary and supplementary data and theory, criticisms and cross-specialty syntheses. Commentators are selected by the following means: (1) BBS maintains a computerized file of over 3000 BBS Associates; the size of this group is increased annually as authors, referees, commentators and nominees of current Associates become eligible to become Associates. Many commentators are selected from this list. (2) The BBS editorial office does informal as well as formal computerized literature searches on the topic of the target articles to find additional potential commentators from across specialties and around the world who are not yet BBS Associates. (3) The referees recommend potential commentators. (4) The author recommends potential commentators. We now propose to add the following source for selecting potential commentators: The abstract of the target article will be posted in the relevant newsgroups on the net. Eligible individuals who judge that they would have a relevant commentary to contribute should contact the editor at the e-mail address indicated at the bottom of this message, or should write by normal mail to: Stevan Harnad Editor Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 Nassau Street, Room 240 Princeton NJ 08542 (phone: 609-921-7771) "Eligibility" usually means being an academically trained professional contributor to one of the disciplines mentioned earlier, or to related academic disciplines. The letter should indicate the candidate's general qualifications as well as their basis for wishing to serve as commentator for the particular target article in question. It is preferable also to enclose a Curriculum Vitae. (This self-nomination format may also be used by those who wish to become BBS Associates, but they must also specify a current Associate who knows their work and is prepared to nominate them; where no current Associate is known by the candidate, the editorial office will send the Vita to approporiate Associates to ask whether they would be prepared to nominate the candidate.) BBS has rapidly become a widely read read and highly influential forum in the biobehavioral and cognitive sciences. A recent recalculation of BBS's "impact factor" (ratio of citations to number of articles) in the American Psychologist [41(3) 1986] reports that already in its fifth year of publication (1982) BBS's impact factor had risen to become the highest of all psychology journals indexed as well as 3rd highest of all 1300 journals indexed in the Social Sciences Citation Index and 50th of all 3900 journals indexed in the Science Citation index, which indexes all the scientific disciplines. Potential commentators should send their names, addresses, a description of their general qualifications and their basis for seeking to comment on this target article in particular to the address indicated earlier or to the following e-mail address: {allegra, bellcore, seismo, rutgers, packard} !princeton!mind!harnad harnad%mind@princeton.csnet -- Stevan Harnad (609) - 921 7771 {allegra, bellcore, seismo, rutgers, packard} !princeton!mind!harnad harnad%mind@princeton.csnet