Publication:
Is Cognitive Neuropsychology Plausible? The Perils of Sitting on a One-Legged Stool

Thumbnail Image

Date

1992

Published Version

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press
The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you.

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Citation

Kosslyn, Stephen Michael, and James M. Intriligator. 1992. Is cognitive neuropsychology plausible? The perils of sitting on a one-legged stool. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 4(1): 96-105.

Research Data

Abstract

We distinguish between strong and weak cognitive neuropsychology, with the former attempting to provide direct insights into the nature of information processing and the latter having the more modest goal of providing constraints on such theories. We argue that strong cognitive neuropsychology, although possible, is unlikely to succeed and that researchers will fare better by combining behavioral, computational, and neural investigations. Arguments offered by Caramazza (1992) in defense of strong neuropsychology are analyzed, and examples are offered to illustrate the power of alternative points of view.

Description

Other Available Sources

Keywords

Terms of Use

This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material (LAA), as set forth at Terms of Service

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Stories