Papers
80
Recent publications related to complex systems
Follow
Scooped by Complexity Digest onto Papers
Scoop.it!

Getting interaction theory (IT) together: Integrating developmental, phenomenological, enactive, and dynamical approaches to social interaction

We argue that progress in our scientific understanding of the ‘social mind’ is hampered by a number of unfounded assumptions. We single out the widely shared assumption that social behavior depends solely on the capacities of an individual agent. In contrast, both developmental and phenomenological studies suggest that the personal-level capacity for detached ‘social cognition’ (conceived as a process of theorizing about and/or simulating another mind) is a secondary achievement that is dependent on more immediate processes of embodied social interaction. We draw on the enactive approach to cognitive science to further clarify this strong notion of ‘social interaction’ in theoretical terms. In addition, we indicate how this interaction theory (IT) could eventually be formalized with the help of a dynamical systems perspective on the interaction process, especially by making use of evolutionary robotics modeling. We conclude that bringing together the methods and insights of developmental, phenomenological, enactive and dynamical approaches to social interaction can provide a promising framework for future research. Keywords: theory of mind; cognitive science; phenomenology; embodied cognition; dynamical systems theory; enactive approach; social cognition; interaction theory; evolutionary robotics

 

Getting interaction theory (IT) together

Integrating developmental, phenomenological, enactive, and dynamical approaches to social interaction

Tom Froese, Shaun Gallagher

Interaction Studies 13:3. 2012. iii, 164 pp. (pp. 436–468)

http://benjamins.com/#catalog/journals/is.13.3.06fro/details

No comment yet.
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Complexity Digest
Scoop.it!

Keystones in a Tangled Bank

In the past decade, ecologists have increasingly applied complex network theory (1, 2) to ecological interactions, both in entire food webs (3) and in networks representing ecological interactions, especially those between plants and their animal pollinators or seed dispersers (4). How important are individual species to the maintenance of such ecological networks? On page 1489 of this issue, Stouffer et al. (5) analyze terrestrial, freshwater, and marine food webs to infer the contributions of individual species to network stability. In a related field study on page 1486 of this issue, Aizen et al. (6) explore plant and pollinator webs on a landscape scale. Using a different field study design, Pocock et al. (7) recently focused on a local community in which several webs of different kinds of interactions and organisms form a composite network.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Complexity Digest
Scoop.it!

Evolutionary Conservation of Species’ Roles in Food Webs

Studies of ecological networks (the web of interactions between species in a community) demonstrate an intricate link between a community’s structure and its long-term viability. It remains unclear, however, how much a community’s persistence depends on the identities of the species present, or how much the role played by each species varies as a function of the community in which it is found. We measured species’ roles by studying how species are embedded within the overall network and the subsequent dynamic implications. Using data from 32 empirical food webs, we find that species’ roles and dynamic importance are inherent species attributes and can be extrapolated across communities on the basis of taxonomic classification alone. Our results illustrate the variability of roles across species and communities and the relative importance of distinct species groups when attempting to conserve ecological communities.

No comment yet.