Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T13:27:09.550Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Can current methods of pathonormal inference tell us anything about modularity?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 1999

David W. Gow
Affiliation:
Neuropsychology Laboratory, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA 02114 gow@helix.mgh.harvard.edu
Philip C. Rodkin
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology: Social and Health Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708 pcr@email.unc.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

This commentary on Müller's target article is designed to help bridge the gap between method and theory in neurobiological approaches to language. We focus on pathonormal inference as reflective of broader conceptual issues concerning universality and modularity. Our commentary directs attention to how current methodological and analytic procedures are less than optimal and minimize possibilities for reaching theoretical consensus. We make suggestions about alternative analytic strategies that provide a direction for future scientific progress.

Information

Type
Continuing Commentary
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press