Information processing, computation, and cognition.

Journal of Biological Physics (Impact Factor: 0.95). 01/2011; 37(1):1-38. DOI: 10.1007/s10867-010-9195-3
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Computation and information processing are among the most fundamental notions in cognitive science. They are also among the most imprecisely discussed. Many cognitive scientists take it for granted that cognition involves computation, information processing, or both - although others disagree vehemently. Yet different cognitive scientists use 'computation' and 'information processing' to mean different things, sometimes without realizing that they do. In addition, computation and information processing are surrounded by several myths; first and foremost, that they are the same thing. In this paper, we address this unsatisfactory state of affairs by presenting a general and theory-neutral account of computation and information processing. We also apply our framework by analyzing the relations between computation and information processing on one hand and classicism, connectionism, and computational neuroscience on the other. We defend the relevance to cognitive science of both computation, at least in a generic sense, and information processing, in three important senses of the term. Our account advances several foundational debates in cognitive science by untangling some of their conceptual knots in a theory-neutral way. By leveling the playing field, we pave the way for the future resolution of the debates' empirical aspects.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Traditionally, in cognitive science the emphasis is on studying cognition from a computational point of view. Studies in biologically inspired robotics and embodied intelligence, however, provide strong evidence that cognition cannot be analyzed and understood by looking at computational processes alone, but that physical system-environment interaction needs to be taken into account. In this opinion article, we review recent progress in cognitive developmental science and robotics, and expand the notion of embodiment to include soft materials and body morphology in the big picture. We argue that we need to build our understanding of cognition from the bottom up; that is, all the way from how our body is physically constructed.
    Trends in Cognitive Sciences 05/2014; · 16.01 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Visually guided distance perception reflects a relationship of geometrical optical variables with the effort required when traversing the distance. We probed how the representations encoding optical variables might define this relationship. Participants visually judged distances on sloped surfaces and reproduced these distances over flat terrain by walking while blindfolded. We examined the responses for the effects of optical variables (i.e., angular declinations from eye height) and tested whether four measures of trial-by-trial effort moderated the use of the represented optical variables. We predicted that observation time and response speed relative to the observed distance would accentuate the effects of encoded optical variables, and that response time and response speed relative to the traversed distance would reduce the effects of those variables. The results confirmed all of the effects except those of observation time. Given the benefits of longer study for strengthening a memory trace, the failure of observation time to predict the use of optical variables raises questions about the representational encoding of visual traces for distance perception. Relationships among optical variables and other effort measures implicate the interaction of processes across multiple time scales, as in cascade dynamics. Cascade dynamics may provide new directions for accounts of visually guided distance perception.
    Attention Perception & Psychophysics 02/2014; · 1.97 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There has been considerable debate in the literature about the relative merits of information processing versus dynamical approaches to understanding cognitive processes. In this article, we explore the relationship between these two styles of explanation using a model agent evolved to solve a relational categorization task. Specifically, we separately analyze the operation of this agent using the mathematical tools of information theory and dynamical systems theory. Information-theoretic analysis reveals how task-relevant information flows through the system to be combined into a categorization decision. Dynamical analysis reveals the key geometrical and temporal interrelationships underlying the categorization decision. Finally, we propose a framework for directly relating these two different styles of explanation and discuss the possible implications of our analysis for some of the ongoing debates in cognitive science.
    Cognitive Science A Multidisciplinary Journal 07/2014; · 2.59 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
May 26, 2014