Reconciled with complexity in research on cognitive systems

Joanna Rączaszek-Leonardi

Abstract


The causes of human behavior cannot be simple. Every move we make has a nested hierarchy of causes that affect its direction, timing and form. The billiard-ball type of causality that is usually assumed to explain human action cannot give sufficient justice to this complexity. In this paper, I point to those perspectives that respect the complexity of cognitive systems and recognize that cognition involves changes on many nested time scales and in many ne- sted systems. A brief overview of methods that are suitable for dealing with such interaction-dominant complex systems is presented and used as a back- ground for describing a specific research program with the aim of clarifying the role of language as one of the nested factors shaping cognition. I illustrate this endeavor with two studies: one concerning the development of language as interaction control and another detailing how language may shape cogni- tive processes on several timescales. Reconciliation with complexity leads us to ask slightly different questions and expect different answers than when using simplified componential models of cognition and helps demarcate the limits of predictability.


Keywords


social sciences methodology; complexity; dynamical systems; in- ter-activity; language

Full Text:

PDF

References


Beim Graben, P., Pinotsis, D., Saddy, D., Potthast, R. 2008. Language processing with dynamic fields. Cognitive Neurodynamics, 2(2): 79–88. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11571- 008-9042-4

Case, P., Tuller, B. 1995. Individual differences and the acquisition of new phonetic categories. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 98(2892). https://doi.org/10.1121/1.414311

Deary, I.J., Caryl, P.G., Gibson, G.J. 1993. Nonstationarity and the Measurement of Psy- chophysical Response in a Visual Inspection-Time Task. Perception, 22(10): 1245– 1256. https://doi.org/10.1068/p221245

Domingos, P. 2000. A Unified Bias-Variance Decomposition for Zero-One and Squared Loss.

Fusaroli, R., Bahrami, B., Olsen, K., Roepstorff, A., Rees, G., Frith, C., Tylen, K. 2012. Coming to Terms: Quantifying the Benefits of Linguistic Coordination. Psychological Science, 23(8): 931–939. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612436816

Gigerenzer, G., Brighton, H. 2009. Homo Heuristicus: Why Biased Minds Make Better Inferences. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1): 107–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756- 8765.2008.01006.x

Guastello, S.J., Gregson, R.A.M. 2016. Nonlinear Dynamical Systems Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences Using Real Data. CRC Press.

Haken, H., Kelso, J.A.S., Bunz, H. 1985. A theoretical model of phase transitions in hu- man hand movements. Biological Cybernetics, 51(5): 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00336922

Healey, P.G.T., Purver, M., Howes, C. 2014. Divergence in Dialogue. PLoS ONE, 9(6): e98598. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0098598

Heft, H. 1989. Affordances and the Body: An Intentional Analysis of Gibson’s Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 19(1): 1– 30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1989.tb00133.x

Hock, H.S., Schöner, G., Giese, M. 2003. The dynamical foundations of mo-tion pattern formation: Stability, selective adaptation, and perceptual continuity. Perception & Psychophysics, 65: 429–457.

Jeka, J.J., Kelso, J.A.S. 1989. The Dynamic Pattern Approach to Coordinated Behavior: A Tutorial Review. ResearchGate, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)60017-5

Jirsa, V.K., Fuchs, A., Kelso, J.A.S. 1998. Connecting Cortical and Behavioral Dynamics: Bimanual Coordination. Neural Computation, 10(8): 2019–2045. https://doi.org/10.1162/089976698300016954

Kelso, J.A.S. 1995. Dynamic Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior. Cam- bridge, Mass.: A Bradford Book.

Leonardi, G., Nomikou, I., Rohlfing, K.J., Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2016. Vocal interactions at the dawn of communication: The emergence of mutuality and complementarity in mother-infant interaction. Proceedings of the IEEE ICDL-EpiRob, Cergy-Pontoise.

Merleau-Ponty, M. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception. Routledge.

Nomikou, I., Leonardi, G., Rohlfing, K., Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2016. Constructing inter- action: the development of gaze dynamics. Infant and Child Development, 25(3): 277– 295, DOI: 10.1002/icd.1975, (IF=1,14), MNiSW 25.

Orsucci, F., Giuliani, A., Webber, C. Jr., Zbilut, J., Fonagy, P., Mazza, M. 2006. Combina- torics and synchronization in natural semiotics, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 361(2): 665–676.

Pattee, H.H., Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2012. LAWS, LANGUAGE and LIFE (Vol. 7). Dor- drecht: Springer Netherlands. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978- 94-007-5161-3

Rączaszek, J., Tuller, B., Shapiro, L.P., Case, P., Kelso, S. 1999. Categorization of ambigu- ous sentences as a function of a changing prosodic parameter: a dynamical ap- proach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(4): 367–393.

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. (in press). How does a word become a message? An illustration on a developmental time-scale. New Ideas in Psychology.

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2010. Multiple Time-Scales of Language Dynamics: An Example From Psycholinguistics. Ecological Psychology, 22(4): 269–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2010.517111

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2014. Multiple Systems and Multiple Time Scales of Language Dynamics: Coping with Complexity. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 21(1-2): 37–52.

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2016. How does a word become a message? An illustration on a developmental time-scale. New Ideas in Psychology, 42: 46–55. doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2015.08.001, (IF=1.44), MNiSW 25

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J., Kelso, J.A.S. 2008. Reconciling symbolic and dynamic aspects of language. New Ideas in Psychology, 26(2): 193–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2007.07.003

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J., Nomikou, I. 2015. Beyond mechanistic interaction: Value-based constraints on meaning in language. Frontiers in Psychology, 6:1579. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01579. (IF=2.6)

Rączaszek-Leonardi, J., Nomikou, I., Rohlfing, K.J. 2013. Young Children’s Dialogical Actions: The Beginnings of Purposeful Intersubjectivity. IEEE Transactions on Au- tonomous Mental Development, 5(3): 210–221. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAMD.2013.2273258

Romero, V., Kallen, R., Riley, M.A., Richardson, M. J. 2015. Can Discrete Joint Action Be Synergistic? Studying the Stabilization of Interpersonal Hand Coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 41(5): 1223–1235. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000083

Scholz, J. P., Schöner, G. 1999. The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task. Experimental Brain Research, 126(3): 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210050738

Schöner, G., Kelso, J.A. 1988. Dynamic pattern generation in behavioral and neural systems. Science (New York, N.Y.), 239(4847): 1513–1520.

Thelen, E. 1992. Development as a Dynamic System. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(6): 189–193.

Thelen, E., Smith, L.B. 1996. A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cogni- tion and Action (Reprint edition). Cambridge, Mass.: A Bradford Book.

Tuller, B., Case, P., Ding, M., Kelso, J.A. 1994. The nonlinear dynamics of speech catego- rization. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 20(1): 3–16.

Van Orden, G.C., Holden, J. G., Turvey, M.T. 2003. Self-organization of cognitive per- formance. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 132(3): 331–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.132.3.331

Von Bertalanffy, L. 1968. General Systems Theory. New York: George Braziller.

Wallot, S., Hollis, G., Rooij, M. van. 2013. Connected Text Reading and Differences in Text Reading Fluency in Adult Readers. PLOS ONE, 8(8). e71914. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071914

Wallot, S., Van Orden, G.C. 2011a. Grounding Language Performance in the Anticipa- tory Dynamics of the Body. Ecological Psychology, 23(3): 157–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2011.591262

Wallot, S., Van Orden, G.C. 2011b. Nonlinear analyses of self-paced reading. The Mental Lexicon, 6(2): 245–274. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.6.2.02wal

Zanone, P.G., Kelso, J.A. 1997. Coordination dynamics of learning and transfer: collec- tive and component levels. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 23(5): 1454–1480.

Zubek, J., Denkiewicz, M., Dębska, A., Radkowska, A., Komorowska-Mach, J., Litwin, P., ... Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. 2016. Performance of Language-Coordinated Collective Systems: A Study of Wine Recognition and Description. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01321


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Joanna Rączaszek-Leonardi