Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T22:05:44.718Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strong modularity and circular reasoning pervade the planning–control model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2004

Verónica C. Ramenzoni  and
Michael A. Riley
Verónica C. Ramenzoni*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0376 www.oz.uc.edu/~rileym/pmdl/RileyLab
Michael A. Riley*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0376 www.oz.uc.edu/~rileym/pmdl/RileyLab
*
ramenzvc@email.uc.edu
michael.riley@uc.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.

We believe the dichotomy of processes introduced in the target article is highly speculative, because the dichotomy is shaped by the questionable assumption of modularity and the complementary assumption of locality. As a result, the author falls into a line of circular reasoning that biases his analysis of the experimental and neuropsychological data, and weakens the proposed model.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 2004 , pp. 48 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2004