Cognitive theory development as we know it: specificity, explanatory power, and the brain

Davide Crepaldi,Simona Amenta

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00056

Abstract

GENERAL COMMENTARY article Front. Psychol., 19 February 2013Sec. Language Sciences Volume 4 - 2013 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00056

Highlights

A commentary on Future Morphology? Summary of visual word identification effects draws attention to necessary efforts in understanding morphological processing by Koester, D. (2012)
The questions raised by Koester (2012) are all well motivated, and their answer strongly influence how the target list is going to be used in future research; for this reason, it is important to address Koester’s questions in a timely manner and, in doing so, to specify more clearly why we believe that the target list is important for the field, and how it should be used
We strongly advocated in our original paper for cognitive theories to become computational models, Koester’s points apply more generally to any kind of cognitive theory, either computational or descriptive; our replies will try to stand at that general level, which stresses the generality and importance of the issues highlighted by Koester (2012)

Summary

Introduction

A commentary on Future Morphology? Summary of visual word identification effects draws attention to necessary efforts in understanding morphological processing by Koester, D. (2012). In an effort to define more precisely what we currently know about early steps in the visual identification of complex words, we recently published a review of morphological effects in lexical decision, unmasked priming and masked priming studies (Amenta and Crepaldi, 2012).

Results

Conclusion