[sci.math.symbolic] BBS Call for Commentators

harnad@mind.UUCP (Stevan Harnad) (02/23/88)

The following are the abstracts of 2 forthcoming articles 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.)

-----
ABSTRACT #1:
	Numerical Competence in Animals: Definitional Issues,
	Current Evidence and a New Research Agenda

		Hank Davis & Rachel Perusse
	 	   University of Guelph

Numerical competence in  animals  has  enjoyed  renewed  interest
recently,  but  there  is still confusion about the definition of
numerical processes.  "Counting" has been  applied  to  phenomena
remote  from  its  meaning  in  the  human  case.  We  propose  a
consistent theoretical framework and  vocabulary  for  evaluating
numerical    competence.    Relative    numerousness   judgments,
"subitizing," counting and estimation are the principal processes
involved.   Ordinality,  cardinality  and  transitivity judgments
also play a role. Our framework can handle a  variety  of  recent
experimental  situations.  Some  evidence  of  generalization and
transfer is needed to demonstrate higher order  ability  such  as
counting;  otherwise  one  only  has  "protocounting" even if all
other alternatives have been excluded.
-----
ABSTRACT #2:
	Developmental Explanation and the Ontogeny of Birdsong
		      Nature/Nurture Redux

                        Timothy Johnston
               University of North Carolina, Greensboro

The view that behavior can  be  partitioned  into  inherited  and
acquired   components   remains   widespread   and   influential,
especially in the study  of  birdsong  development.  This  target
article  criticizes  the  growing  tendency  to  diagnose  songs,
elements of songs, or precursors of  songs  (song  templates)  as
either  innate  or  learned  on  the  basis  of isolation-rearing
experiments. Such experiments offer only a crude analysis of  the
contribution  of  experience  to  song development and provide no
information at all about genetic effects,  despite  arguments  to
the  contrary. Because developmental questions are so often posed
in terms of the learned/innate dichotomy, the  possible  role  of
nonobvious  contributions  to  song  development has been largely
ignored. An  alternative  approach,  based  on  Daniel  Lehrman's
interactionist theory of development, gives a better sense of the
issues that remain to be addressed in studies of song development
and provides a more secure conceptual foundation.
-----

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.

BBS 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:

harnad@mind.princeton.edu

[Subscription information for BBS is available from Harry Florentine at
Cambridge University Press:  800-221-4512]
-- 

Stevan Harnad		 harnad@mind.princeton.edu	 (609)-921-7771