Talk:Cognitive revolution

message: The article claims that cognitive psychology has had success predicting behavior?  What are these successes?  I'm personally not aware of any cases in which psychologists have developed equations that predict behavior with any accuracy.  It's very clear that the cognitive approach is dominant among psychologists and others, but if we are going to claim that it has been objectively successful in predictions we should give the readers some indication of what those are.SmartPatrol (talk) 04:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been solved. -DoctorW 03:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Predictive claims

message: This article is too heavy on defense of and apologetics for behaviorism and the behaviorist point of view. It should be more balanced. Furthermore, the behaviorist position has been undermined in important ways by empirical results, and the cognitive perspective has gained a clear ascendancy. That should be reflected in the article. -DoctorW 03:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Apologetics

message: The cognitive revolution reached its height in the 1980s with publications by philosophers such as Daniel Dennett and artificial intelligence experts like Douglas Hofstadter.
If it reached its height in the 1980s, does this imply it has been in decline since then? The article should clarify this, and inform the reader if whether or not it is still dominant and if not, what other approaches have gained favor since then.  Shanoman (talk) 09:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peaked in the 1980's? 

message: In reference to behaviorism, the article states:” This school was heavily influenced by Ivan Pavlov, B.F. Skinner, and other physiologists.”  In fact, Skinner was not a physiologist and held that “physiologizing” was neither necessary or desirable (see e.g., http://web.stcloudstate.edu/gcmertens/science_behavior/ScienceBehavior-Theory.htm).
The article also discusses “The rejection of mental states by the behaviorists”.  In fact, Tolman is often considered to be a behaviorist who explained behavior using mental states.  It would be more accurate to note that behaviorists had a tendency to reject mental states in favor of other hypothetical constructs (like synaptic connections or implicit behaviors).
DJM77bci (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some issues with this page: 

message: : Bernard Baars (1986), "Interview with Herbert A. Simon," in: Bernard Baars, The Cognitive Revolution in Psychology 
Q: When would you say the main change took place in the views of scientific psychologists? George Miller suggests -- facetiously, I think -- that the shift took place on September 12, 1956, because there was a conference at that time where you and Allen Newell presented a paper on a system for discovering proofs of logic theorems; Green and Swets presented a paper on signal detection theory; and George Miller presented a paper on the magic number 7, plus or minus 2.
A: At that conference, Chomsky also gave one of his first presentations of the three theories of grammar. And there was the publication of the Bruner, Goodnow, and Austin (1956) book. All these ideas were enormously influential later on. 
These events all took place in that year. Nineteen fifty-six was obviously the key year in terms of these things all coming to a jell. There were a lot of things that happened before 1956, but if one wants to have a starting point, then it's as good a place as any. (pp. 372-373) [my boldtype] --KYPark (talk) 17:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interview with [[Herbert A. Simon]] 

message: According to George Miller,  “I date the moment of conception of cognitive science as 11 September,1956, the second day of a symposium organized by the
‘Special Interest Group in Information Theory’ at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. At the time, of course, no one realized that something special had
happened so no one thought that it needed a name; that came much later.”
 
Steven Pinker (et al) claims that “Harvard was the site of a revolution—the Cognitive Revolution” in 1956.  
But According to Howard Gardner, the beginning of the “Cognitive Revolution” may be
dated to 1948, the year a symposium entitled Cerebral Mechanisms of Behavior was
hosted at California Institute of Technology (aka “the Hixon Symposium” (see  LinaVoce60 (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth of the "Cognitive Revolution" 

message: I found my way here expecting to read about the relatively sudden increase in cognitive ability that seems to occurred in humans c. 70k years ago as evidenced by the earliest indications of art and culture.   I've always seen it referred to as the "cognitive revolution". 
A quick google showed that I wasn't imagining it - it really is termed "cognitive revolution". Wikipedia call it "Human evolution (origins of society and culture)" - which is obviously descriptive but not an obvious title when an alternative is in reasonably common use.
It's clear that this article refers to the most common usage of the term. I'm just wondering if a signpost to the alternative meaning would be appropriate. 
Should I be taking this up on the other page?  (But since I found this one first I thought I'd start here) 212.74.5.11 (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I would opt for a hatnote. . I boldly added to this article. Hope this helps? Arnoutf (talk) 17:37, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nicely done, thanks! I adjusted the first parameter of the hatnote to read "late 20th-century developments in the cognitive sciences" to avoid possible confusion with Emergence. Just plain Bill (talk) 17:48, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation needed?  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cognitive revolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100610043523/http://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/cacioppo/jtcreprints/kc94.pdf to http://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/cacioppo/jtcreprints/kc94.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:26, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article understandably implies a Kuhn-ian shift in paradigm, most notably in the final paragraph of the introduction. However it may be prudent to mention that the cognitive revolution "is not best represented in terms of a Kuhnian 'paradigm shift' (Lachman, Lachman, & Butterfield, 1979; Palermo, 1971; Weimer & Palermo, 1973)" because the changes "did not result in the abandonment of the central principles of operant or classical conditioning theories — the core theoretical elements of the behaviorist paradigm. Moreover, behaviorists continued to maintain their in-house journals, their own APA division, and a sizable professional membership (Leahey, 1997). Nor were these recognized anomalies the primary stimulus for the development of cognitive theories in the 1950s, which was provided by outside developments in artificial intelligence and the computer simulation of cognitive abilities (Baars, 1986; Gardner, 1985)." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gkleiman (talk • contribs) 22:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: See also, e.g., Terry L. Smith's book Behavior and its Causes: Philosophical Foundations of Operant Psychology (published earlier than the article by Greenwood that you cited above), quoted in : "even though radical behaviorism may have been a failure, the operant program of research has been a success. Furthermore, operant psychology and cognitive psychology complement one another, each having its own domain within which it contributes something valuable to, but beyond the reach of, the other." Biogeographist (talk) 01:25, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revolution as a paradigm shift