Evaluating computational models in cognitive neuropsychology: the case from the consonant/vowel distinction.

Full Abstract

Caramazza et al. [Caramazza, A., Chialant, D., Capasso, R., & Miceli, G. (2000). Separable processing of consonants and vowels. Nature, 403(6768), 428-430.] report two patients who exhibit a double dissociation between consonants and vowels in speech production. The patterning of this double dissociation cannot be explained by appealing to sub-phonemic distinctions, such as sonority level or damage to specific phonological features. They argue that consonant/vowel status is an autonomous level of representation. Monaghan and Shillcock [Monaghan, P., & Shillcock, R. (2003). Connectionist modelling of the separable processing of consonants and vowels. Brain and Language, 86(1), 83-98.] present computational models which supposedly exhibit a similar double dissociation. They contend that these models can explain the patient data, without appeal to such supra-phonemic distinctions as consonant/vowel status. Here we argue that their claim fails to meet two necessary criteria. Their models do not fit the pattern of the patient data, either quantitatively or qualitatively. Furthermore, the motivation for these models is unclear beyond just being an attempt to explain this specific phenomenon. We conclude that these models, in their current form, do not provide an alternative explanation to the representation of consonants and vowels.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Knobel, Mark (M); Caramazza, Alfonso (A);

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Cognitive Neuropsychology Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Comment; Journal Article

Journal: Brain and language (Brain Lang), published in United States. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2007-Jan; vol 100 (issue 1) : pp 95-100; discussion 101-8

Dates: Created 2006/11/22; Completed 2007/03/14;

PMID: 16879863, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 12/26/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

Comments and Corrections

CommentOn: Brain Lang. 2003 Jul;86(1):83-98. (PMID: 12821417)

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

Aphasia - diagnosis; physiopathology
Brain Damage, Chronic - diagnosis; physiopathology
Cerebral Cortex - physiopathology
Comprehension - physiology
Concept Formation - physiology
Dyslexia - diagnosis; physiopathology
Humans
Neural Networks (Computer)

These are the highest related articles currently in the database:

Bilingual deep dysphasia. 29 Apr 2008
The neural basis of predicate-argument structure. 30 May 2003
Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language. 29 Apr 2004
RAPID automatized naming (RAN); neurological substrates of dyslexia. 29 Nov 2005
Impaired performance of right-brain-damaged patients on a sentence anagram task. 27 Feb 2005
Processing homonymy and polysemy: effects of sentential context and time-course following unilateral brain damage. 29 Nov 2005
Do people use language production to make predictions during comprehension? 22 Jan 2007
An fMRI study of canonical and noncanonical word order in German. 29 Sep 2007
Psychophysiological analysis of the influence of vasopressin on speech in patients with post-stroke aphasias. 29 Apr 2007
The neural integration of speaker and message. 30 Mar 2008

See 100+ related articles.