PL3233: Cognitive Psychology - Term Paper

Researchers have used the concept of “emergent properties” to explain various aspects of cognition. Critically evaluate the use of this approach, focusing on one or more specific examples of cognitive phenomena, in explaining the nature of cognition.

The concept of “emergent properties” suggests that cognitive processes arise naturally “as a consequence of dynamic interactions that take place within the cognitive system” (Kintsch, 1999). By this approach, it implies that there is no unitary and distinct domain that is responsible for the cognitive phenomena.

Consider working memory from the emergent perspective. It is specifically a “controlled processing involving active maintenance and/or rapid learning, where controlled processing is an emergent property of the dynamic interactions of multiple brain systems” (O’ Reilly, Braver & Cohen, 1999). This implies a non-unitary nature of working memory where task performance requires for information to be coded or represented; attention to be controlled and directed to the relevant information and achieving and maintaining activation of the information when retrieval of it is made.

This interactive nature of working memory is exhibited by Engle’s model of working memory which involves the interaction of three components: First, the “Grouping skills, coding strategies and procedures for maintaining activation” ensures encoding and representation of information phonologically, visually, spatially, etc. which demands different levels of attention depending on the type of task and person involved. With successful encoding and representation, they become a part of the second component of “Short-term memory”, where they can either be further activated with attention focused on them or loss due to decay or interference. The “Central Executive” is the third component which helps to achieve activation of stored information through controlled retrieval. It is also directs controlled attention to encoding, representation and maintaining activation of STM in the other two components by blocking interference through inhibition of distractors (Engle, 1999).

What makes this “emergent property” approach plausible is because the explanation of working memory cannot be directly localised to an “independent mental level” (Bechtel & Richardson, 1992). As demonstrated by Engle’s model, working memory arises in the presence and interaction of different types of representation formats, controlled attention as well as the capacity to achieve and maintain activation of STM. Without any of which, working memory would be impossible. In addition, since working memory entails capacity limits and these limits can result from fundamentally different factors such as information-decay, limits in speed of processing or proactive interference (Miyake & Shah, 1999), it indicates that these limiting factors are affecting different aspects of working memory. Therefore, it seems evident that working memory is indeed, emergent from different interactive components.

Nevertheless, while the concept of “emergent properties” in working memory may seem more plausible than attributing it to a single determinant, problems still exist in characterizing the exact nature of subcomponents that interact for working memory to emerge (Kintsch, 1999). As opposed to Engle’s model, Baddeley (1999) postulates the visuospatial sketchpad, phonological loop, episodic buffer and the central executive as components of his working memory model. This difference is due to the limitations of methods used to investigate the nature of working memory, such as dual-task studies, that “cannot differentiate between models that define subsystems in terms of storage buffers, specialised processes, or pools of resources” (Kintsch, 1999). That is, while empirical evidence from dual-task studies can determine if a particular component is used by working memory, it cannot establish if the component was a storage buffer or otherwise, rendering the nature of subsystems from which working memory emerged, unclear.

Bibliography

1) Baddeley, Alan D. & Logie, Robert H. (1999). Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Miyake, Akira & Shah, Priti (Ed.), Working Memory: The Multiple-Component Model (pp. 28-61). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

2) Engle, Randall W., Kane, Michael J. & Tuholski, Stephen W. (1999). Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Miyake, Akira & Shah, Priti (Ed.), Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity and What They Tell Us About Controlled Attention, General Fluid Intelligence, and Functions of the Prefrontal Cortex. (pp. 102-134). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

3) O’Reilly, Randall C., Braver, Todd S. & Cohen, Jonathan D. (1999). Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Miyake, Akira & Shah, Priti (Ed.), A Biologically Based Computational Model of Working Memory (pp. 375-411). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

4) Kintsch, Walter, Healy, Alice F., Hegarty, Mary, Pennignton, Bruce F. & Salthouse, Timothy A. (1999). Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Miyake, Akira & Shah, Priti (Ed.), Models of Working Memory: Eight Questions and Some General Issues (pp. 412-441). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

5) Miyake, Akira & Shah, Priti. (1999). Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control. Miyake, Akira & Shah, Priti (Ed.), Toward Unified Theories of Working Memory: Emerging General Consensus, Unresolved Theoretical Issues, and Future Research Directions (pp. 442-482). United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

6) Betchel, William & Richardson, Robert C. (1992). Emergence or Reduction? Beckermann, Ansgar, Flohr, Hans & Kim, Jaegwon (Ed.), Emergent Phenomena and Complex Systems (pp. 257-288). Germany: Walter de Gruyter & Co.