What happened to cognitive science?

Núñez, Rafael; Allen, Michael G.; Gao, Richard; Rigoli, Carson Miller; Relaford-Doyle, Josephine; Semenuks, Arturs

doi:10.1038/s41562-019-0626-2

Cited by 132 publications

(164 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

152

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Núñez and colleagues argue that cognitive science has failed. There are two key elements to their argument: first, that cognitive science “was meant to have a cohesive subject matter, complementary methods, and integrated theories” (Núñez et al, , Abstract); and, second, that it has failed to arrive at a unified cohesive view. The central point of their paper is that this failure to converge on a single view means that the field has failed and calls into question its future.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Science Is and Should Be Pluralistic

Gentner¹

2019

Topics in Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Núñez et al (2019) argue (1) that the field of Cognitive Science has failed, in that it has not arrived at a cohesive theory, and (2) that this is contrary to the intentions of the founders. Their survey of publication and citation patterns bears out the lack of a cohesive theory and also provides corroboration for (3) the concern that the field is becoming unbalanced, with psychology overweighted (Gentner, 2010). I will argue against points (1) and (2), but agree with point (3). My central claim is that cognitive science was never meant to have one unified theoretical framework, nor should it have.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive Science Is and Should Be Pluralistic

Gentner¹

2019

Topics in Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, the Cognitive Science Society's first journal is now in its 43rd year, having just moved to twelve issues per year, and the number of submissions per year has grown by about 75% over the last 10 years. And yet Núñez et al () argue on bibliometric and socio‐institutional grounds that cognitive science is failing. Whether this is true depends on the goals of cognitive science.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whether this is true depends on the goals of cognitive science. If its goal was simply to be a new science in its own right, then the analysis of Núñez et al () should carry significant weight. If its goal was instead to advance our understanding of mind, then different criteria for success are required.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multidisciplinary Flux and Multiple Research Traditions Within Cognitive Science

Cooper

2019

Topics in Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Núñez et al. (2019) argue that cognitive science has failed either “to transition to a mature inter‐disciplinary coherent field” (p. 782) or “to generate a successful [Lakatosian] research program” (p. 789). We argue that the former was never the intention of many early researchers within the field, while the latter is an inappropriate criterion by which to judge an entire discipline. However, we concur with Núñez et al. (2019) that the individual disciplinary balance within cognitive science has changed over time. Of particular concern is the fact that the use of computational methods appears to be on the wane.

show abstract

“…Núñez et al () argue that the enterprise of establishing a field called “cognitive science” has failed. This dark verdict derives from the particular criteria and methodology they chose to employ, which fail to capture the field's remarkable progress to date and exciting prospects for the future.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Núñez et al's evaluation criteria derive centrally from the concept of “strong cognitive science,” a term coined by some early commentators on the field. The vision of strong cognitive science is that of a “gradual attenuation of disciplinary boundaries and loyalties” between the six disciplines originally included in the Cognitive Science Hexagon over 40 years ago (philosophy, psychology, linguistics, computer science, anthropology, and neuroscience), resulting in a “cohesive research program” and a “coherent field” (Núñez et al, ). This framing of success is excessively demanding on two counts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%