The Experts below are selected from a list of 312 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Jaak Panksepp - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • rethinking the Cognitive Revolution from a neural perspective how overuse misuse of the term cognition and the neglect of affective controls in behavioral neuroscience could be delaying progress in understanding the brainmind
    Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2011
    Co-Authors: Howard C. Cromwell, Jaak Panksepp
    Abstract:

    Words such as cognition, motivation and emotion powerfully guide theory development and the overall aims and goals of behavioral neuroscience research. Once such concepts are accepted generally as natural aspects of the brain, their influence can be pervasive and long lasting. Importantly, the choice of conceptual terms used to describe and study mental/neural functions can also constrain research by forcing the results into seemingly useful ‘conceptual’ categories that have no discrete reality in the brain. Since the popularly named ‘Cognitive Revolution’ in psychological science came to fruition in the early 1970s, the term Cognitive or cognition has been perhaps the most widely used conceptual term in behavioral neuroscience. These terms, similar to other conceptual terms, have potential value if utilized appropriately. We argue that recently the term cognition has been both overused and misused. This has led to problems in developing a usable shared definition for the term and to promotion of possible misdirections in research within behavioral neuroscience. In addition, we argue that Cognitive-guided research influenced primarily by top-down (cortical toward subcortical) perspectives without concurrent non-Cognitive modes of bottom-up developmental thinking, could hinder progress in the search for new treatments and medications for psychiatric illnesses and neurobehavioral disorders. Overall, linkages of animal research insights to human psychology may be better served by bottom-up (subcortical to cortical) affective and motivational ‘state-control’ perspectives, simply because the lower networks of the brain are foundational for the construction of higher ‘information-processing’ aspects of mind. Moving forward, rapidly expanding new techniques and creative methods in neuroscience along with more accurate brain concepts, may help guide the development of new therapeutics and hopefully more accurate ways to describe and explain brain-behavior relationships.

  • Rethinking the Cognitive Revolution from a neural perspective: how overuse/misuse of the term 'cognition' and the neglect of affective controls in behavioral neuroscience could be delaying progress in understanding the BrainMind.
    Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2011
    Co-Authors: Howard C. Cromwell, Jaak Panksepp
    Abstract:

    Words such as cognition, motivation and emotion powerfully guide theory development and the overall aims and goals of behavioral neuroscience research. Once such concepts are accepted generally as natural aspects of the brain, their influence can be pervasive and long lasting. Importantly, the choice of conceptual terms used to describe and study mental/neural functions can also constrain research by forcing the results into seemingly useful ‘conceptual’ categories that have no discrete reality in the brain. Since the popularly named ‘Cognitive Revolution’ in psychological science came to fruition in the early 1970s, the term Cognitive or cognition has been perhaps the most widely used conceptual term in behavioral neuroscience. These terms, similar to other conceptual terms, have potential value if utilized appropriately. We argue that recently the term cognition has been both overused and misused. This has led to problems in developing a usable shared definition for the term and to promotion of possible misdirections in research within behavioral neuroscience. In addition, we argue that Cognitive-guided research influenced primarily by top-down (cortical toward subcortical) perspectives without concurrent non-Cognitive modes of bottom-up developmental thinking, could hinder progress in the search for new treatments and medications for psychiatric illnesses and neurobehavioral disorders. Overall, linkages of animal research insights to human psychology may be better served by bottom-up (subcortical to cortical) affective and motivational ‘state-control’ perspectives, simply because the lower networks of the brain are foundational for the construction of higher ‘information-processing’ aspects of mind. Moving forward, rapidly expanding new techniques and creative methods in neuroscience along with more accurate brain concepts, may help guide the development of new therapeutics and hopefully more accurate ways to describe and explain brain-behavior relationships.

Daniel David - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

D.g.b Victor - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Cognitive Revolution and the political psychology of elite decision making
    Perspectives on Politics, 2013
    Co-Authors: Emilie M. Hafner-burton, D. Alex Hughes, D.g.b Victor
    Abstract:

    Experimental evidence in Cognitive psychology and behavioral economics is transforming the way political science scholars think about how humans make decisions in areas of high complexity, uncertainty, and risk. Nearly all those studies utilize convenience samples of university students, but in the real world political elites actually make most pivotal political decisions such as threatening war or changing the course of economic policy. Highly experienced elites are more likely to exhibit the attributes of rational decision-making; and over the last fifteen years a wealth of studies suggest that such elites are likely to be more skilled in strategic bargaining than samples with less germane experience. However, elites are also more likely to suffer overconfidence, which degrades decision-making skills. We illustrate implications for political science with a case study of crisis bargaining between the US and North Korea. Variations in the experience of US elite decision-makers between 2002 and 2006 plausibly explain the large shift in US crisis signaling better than other rival hypotheses such as “Iraq fatigue.” Beyond crisis bargaining other major political science theories might benefit from attention to the attributes of individual decision-makers.

  • The Cognitive Revolution and the Political Psychology of Elite Decision Making
    SSRN Electronic Journal, 2012
    Co-Authors: Emilie M. Hafner-burton, D. Alex Hughes, D.g.b Victor
    Abstract:

    Growing experimental evidence in Cognitive psychology and behavioral economics is shaping the way political science scholars think about how humans make decision in areas of high complexity, uncertainty and risk. Nearly all those studies utilize convenience samples of university students, but insights from that work may not be directly applicable to decisions that are made by political elites. We survey the nascent empirical literature on elite decision-making and look at six areas where the insights of Cognitive psychology and behavioral economics are particularly relevant for political behavior and where evidence suggests that experienced elites differ from convenience samples. These differences suggest testable implications for theories of political decision making, which we illustrate in one major area of political science theory — crisis bargaining.

Darryl W Schneider - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Shao Ying-sheng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Quest for Meaning and Psychological Studies,Also a Brief Discussion of the Principles of the Second Cognitive Revolution
    Journal of Nanjing Normal University, 2006
    Co-Authors: Shao Ying-sheng
    Abstract:

    Modern western psychology is now taking in a new way of description,when the other two——behavioral and cognitivist-have been given up.The second Cognitive Revolution may turn psychology back to its conventional and common-sense tradition: psychology is the study of an individual agent or an agent of a group.The first Cognitive Revolution made clear a truth: psychology should be the psychological study of meaning.The Cognitive psychology inheriting behaviorism methodologically,however,mistook "meaning making" as "information processing",aspiring after the mental representations in human mindthe "mirror of nature".The introduction of the discourse concept provides a pragmatic platform for the psychologists who believe that meaning can and can only be decided by context,social-linguistic conventions and social exchange modes.The understanding and construction of meaning,then,is critical in the development of psychology.We maintain that the concept of discourse is central to psychological studies.Mind is a dynamic concept and emerges from history,politics,culture,society and human context.