What Does Theoretical Neuroscience Have to Offer the Study of Behavioral Development?

Spencer, John P.; Simmering, Vanessa R.; Schutte, Anne R.; Schöner, Gregor

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189223.003.0014

Cited by 69 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 101 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

131

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The three-layer architecture of the DFT, shown in Figure 1, was developed to account for performance across a number of spatial memory tasks (Spencer et al, 2007), and was recently extended to capture some characteristics of change detection performance (e.g., Johnson, Spencer, & Schöner, 2009). This type of model architecture, dynamic neural fields, was first developed by Amari (1977) to capture the neural dynamics of visual cortex.…”

Section: Modeling Change Detection Performance Over Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous work in spatial cognitive development established the SPH to account for development of children’s spatial recall biases (e.g., Schutte & Spencer, 2009), position discrimination performance (Simmering & Spencer, 2008), interactions between spatial working memory and long-term memory (Schutte et al, 2003), and perception of symmetry axes (Ortmann & Schutte, 2010). According to this hypothesis, neural interactions within and between layers in the model become stronger over development, purportedly through Hebbian learning and/or synaptogenesis (discussed further in Section 6; see also, e.g., Spencer et al, 2007). …”

Section: Modeling Change Detection Performance Over Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To this end, Simmering adapted the Dynamic Field Theory (DFT), a model of spatial cognition and development (see e.g., Spencer, Simmering, Schutte, & Schöner, 2007), to capture capacity limits from change detection in a neurally-grounded computational model. The core architecture of the model (described further in Section 2 below) consists of three layers of neurons tuned along a continuous color dimension.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Models provide specificity: Testing a proposed mechanism of visual working memory capacity development

Simmering

Patterson

2012

Cognitive Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have established that visual working memory has a limited capacity, and that capacity increases during childhood. However, debate continues over the source of capacity limits and its developmental increase. Simmering (2008) adapted a computational model of spatial cognitive development, the Dynamic Field Theory, to explain not only the source of capacity limitations but also the developmental mechanism. According to the model, capacity is limited by the balance between excitation and inhibition that maintains multiple neural representations simultaneously. Moreover, development is implemented according to the Spatial Precision Hypothesis, which proposes that excitatory and inhibitory connections strengthen throughout early childhood. Critically, these changes in connectivity result in increasing precision and stability of neural representations over development. Here we test this developmental mechanism by probing children’s memory in a single-item change detection task. Results confirmed the model’s predictions, providing further support for this account of visual working memory capacity development.

show abstract

Section: Modeling Change Detection Performance Over Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modeling Change Detection Performance Over Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Models provide specificity: Testing a proposed mechanism of visual working memory capacity development

Simmering

Patterson

2012

Cognitive Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although neural networks have architectures that can be depicted as separate systems, they are at their core complex, reentrant, densely interconnected systems that violate core assumptions of encapsulation and separability (for discussion, see Spencer, et al, 2007).…”

Section: Overview Of the Dynamic Field Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several theories have confronted the challenges of achieving generality with specificity, with varying levels of success (e.g., Cohen & Servan-Schreiber, 1992;Love, Medin & Gureckis, 2004;McClelland, McNaughton & O'Reilly, 1995;Morton & Munakata, 2002); here, we present one such theory, the Dynamic Field Theory (DFT) of spatial cognition (Spencer, Simmering, Schutte & Schöner, 2007). The dynamic field framework was originally developed to capture the dynamics of neural activation in visual cortex (Amari, 1977).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Simmering¹,

Schutte²,

Spencer³

2008

Brain Research

Self Cite

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within cognitive neuroscience, computational models are designed to provide insights into the organization of behavior while adhering to neural principles. These models should provide sufficient specificity to generate novel predictions while maintaining the generality needed to capture behavior across tasks and/or time scales. This paper presents one such model, the Dynamic Field Theory (DFT) of spatial cognition, showing new simulations that provide a demonstration proof that the theory generalizes across developmental changes in performance in four tasks-the Piagetian A-not-B task, a sandbox version of the A-not-B task, a canonical spatial recall task, and a position discrimination task. Model simulations demonstrate that the DFT can accomplish both specificity-generating novel, testable predictions-and generality-spanning multiple tasks across development with a relatively simple developmental hypothesis. Critically, the DFT achieves generality across tasks and time scales with no modification to its basic structure and with a strong commitment to neural principles. The only change necessary to capture development in the model was an increase in the precision of the tuning of receptive fields as well as an increase in the precision of local excitatory interactions among neurons in the model. These small quantitative changes were sufficient to move the model through a set of quantitative and qualitative behavioral changes that span the age range from 8 months to 6 years and into adulthood. We conclude by considering how the DFT is positioned in the literature, the challenges on the horizon for our framework, and how a dynamic field approach can yield new insights into development from a computational cognitive neuroscience perspective.

show abstract

Developmental Processes

2005

Tissue Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party websites are prohibited. In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or institutional repository. Authors requiring further information regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are encouraged to visit: http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

show abstract

What Does Theoretical Neuroscience Have to Offer the Study of Behavioral Development?

Cited by 69 publications

References 101 publications

Models provide specificity: Testing a proposed mechanism of visual working memory capacity development

Models provide specificity: Testing a proposed mechanism of visual working memory capacity development

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Developmental Processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About