Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T14:57:46.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Decontextualised data IN, decontextualised theory OUT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 1999

Benjamin Roberts ,
Mike Kalish ,
Kathryn Hird  and
Kim Kirsner
Benjamin Roberts
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Western Australia, Perth 6907, Australiabenjamin,kalish,kim@psy.uwa.edu.au www.psy.uwa.edu.au
Mike Kalish
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Western Australia, Perth 6907, Australiabenjamin,kalish,kim@psy.uwa.edu.au www.psy.uwa.edu.au
Kathryn Hird
Affiliation:
School of Speech and Hearing Science, Curtin University of Technology, Perth 6845, Australiathirdkm@alpha1.curtin.edu.au www.curtin.edu.au/curtin/dept/shs
Kim Kirsner
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Western Australia, Perth 6907, Australiabenjamin,kalish,kim@psy.uwa.edu.au www.psy.uwa.edu.au
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 discuss our concerns associated with three assumptions upon which the model of Levelt, Roelofs & Meyer is based: assumed generalisability of decontextualised experimental programs, assumed highly modular architecture of the language production systems, and assumed symbolic computations within the language production system. We suggest that these assumptions are problematic and require further justification.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , February 1999 , pp. 54 - 55
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press