Identifying the optimal response is not a necessary step toward explaining function

Henry Brighton*, Henrik Olsson

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Oaksford & Chater (O&C) argue that a rational analysis is required to explain why a functional process model is successful, and that, when a rational analysis is intractable, the prospects for understanding cognition from a functional perspective are gloomy. We discuss how functional explanations can be arrived at without seeking the optimal response function demanded by a rational analysis, and argue that explaining function does not require optimality.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)85-+
Number of pages8
JournalBehavioral and Brain Sciences
Volume32
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2009
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • COGNITION

Cite this

@article{6854587a89d94ed58a9877b253c55008,
title = "Identifying the optimal response is not a necessary step toward explaining function",
abstract = "Oaksford & Chater (O&C) argue that a rational analysis is required to explain why a functional process model is successful, and that, when a rational analysis is intractable, the prospects for understanding cognition from a functional perspective are gloomy. We discuss how functional explanations can be arrived at without seeking the optimal response function demanded by a rational analysis, and argue that explaining function does not require optimality.",
keywords = "COGNITION",
author = "Henry Brighton and Henrik Olsson",
year = "2009",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1017/S0140525X09000302",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "85--+",
journal = "Behavioral and Brain Sciences",
issn = "0140-525X",
publisher = "CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS",
number = "1",

}

Identifying the optimal response is not a necessary step toward explaining function. / Brighton, Henry; Olsson, Henrik.

In: Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Vol. 32, No. 1, 02.2009, p. 85-+.

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Identifying the optimal response is not a necessary step toward explaining function

AU - Brighton, Henry

AU - Olsson, Henrik

PY - 2009/2

Y1 - 2009/2

N2 - Oaksford & Chater (O&C) argue that a rational analysis is required to explain why a functional process model is successful, and that, when a rational analysis is intractable, the prospects for understanding cognition from a functional perspective are gloomy. We discuss how functional explanations can be arrived at without seeking the optimal response function demanded by a rational analysis, and argue that explaining function does not require optimality.

AB - Oaksford & Chater (O&C) argue that a rational analysis is required to explain why a functional process model is successful, and that, when a rational analysis is intractable, the prospects for understanding cognition from a functional perspective are gloomy. We discuss how functional explanations can be arrived at without seeking the optimal response function demanded by a rational analysis, and argue that explaining function does not require optimality.

KW - COGNITION

U2 - 10.1017/S0140525X09000302

DO - 10.1017/S0140525X09000302

M3 - Editorial

VL - 32

SP - 85-+

JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

JF - Behavioral and Brain Sciences

SN - 0140-525X

IS - 1

ER -