Reviews: LTMM

geekmom @ Flickr

Language, Thought, Modularity of Mind

• Bloom, P. & Keil, F. (2001). Thinking through language. Mind and Language.16, 351-367 (copy here)
• Kay, P., & Regier, T. (2006). Language, Thought, and Color: Recent Developments. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 51–54 (copy here) (also see the rest of Kay & Regier's recent publications)
• Boroditsky, L. (2003). Linguistic Relativity. In L. Nadel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, (pp.917-922). London: Macmillan (copy here) (be careful though because she has been shown to be wrong about a few things; see Chen, J. -Y., [2006] and January and Kako [2006])
• Fodor, J. (1983). The Modularity of Mind. MIT Press Cambridge, Mass. (this chapter)
• Bates, E. (1993) Modularity, domain specificity and the development of language. Technical Report 9305. Center for Research in Language, UCSD (copy here)
• Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1999). Is vision continuous with cognition? The case for cognitive impenetrability of visual perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(3), 341-423 (copy here)
  

Reviews: Human Factors

davemorris @ Flickr

Human Factors

• Parasuraman, R. (2003). Neuroergonomics: Research and practice. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 4, 5-20. (copy here)
  
• Fundamental Human Factors Concepts, Civial Aviation Authority (copy here)
• Chalmers, P.A. (2003). The role of cognitive theory in human-computer interface. Computers in Human Behavior, 9, (5) (copy here)
  
• There's also a great chapter or paper from 2007 by Christopher Wickens called 'Aviation' or something like that. Even with the full force of the Google machine I can't find it again though. It's great because it covers so much of the course material with nice examples from aviation. The only snippet of original info I have from it is a quotation, "how they should be carried out, and when they should be done.” and the ref (Wickens, 2007, p.375). Good luck searching for it...

Reviews: Evolutionary

What a beard.

Evolutionary

• Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (2003). Evolutionary psychology: Theoretical Foundations. In Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science. (pp. 54-64). London: Macmillan. (copy here)
  
• Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. (2005). Conceptual foundations of evolutionary psychology. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 5-67). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. (copy here)
• Ermer, E., Guerin, S., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., & Miller, M. (2006) Theory of mind broad and narrow: Reasoning about social exchange engages ToM areas, precautionary reasoning does not. Social Neuroscience, 1 (3-4), 196-219. (copy here)
• Cosmides, L, Tooby, J., Fiddick, L. & Bryant, G. (2005). Detecting cheaters. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(11), 505-506 (copy here)
• Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (2007) Is the "Cinderella effect" controversial? A case study of evolution-minded research and critiques thereof. In C Crawford & D Krebs, eds., Foundations of evolutionary psychology. Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.
• Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (2005) The 'Cinderella Effect' is no fairy tale. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9: 507-508. (copy here)
  
• Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (2005) Carpe Diem: Adaptation and devaluing the future The Quarterly Review of Biology 80: 55-61. (copy here)
• Daly M, Wilson M (2002) Introduction: two special issues on risk. Evolution & Human Behavior 23: 1-2. (copy here)
• Daly M, Wilson M (2001) Risk-taking, Intrasexual Competition, and Homicide. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 47: 1-36. (copy here)

Reviews: Developmental Disorders

ylvas @ Flickr

Developmental Disorders

• Mervis, C.B. & Becerra, A.M. (2007) Language and communicative development in Williams syndrome. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev, 13 (1), 3-15 (copy here)
  
• Brock, J. (2007). Language abilities in Williams syndrome: a critical review. Development and Psychopathology, 19, 97-127
• Abbeduto, L. Warren, S.F. & Conners, F.A. (2007) Language development in Down syndrome: From the prelinguistic period to the acquisition of literacy. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13 (3), 247
• Silverman, W. (2007). Down syndrome: Cognitive phenotype. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13 (3), 22
• Roberts, J.E., Price, J., & Malkin, C. (2007) Language and communication development in down syndrome. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13 (1), 26-35
• Smith, S.D (2007). Genes, language development, and language disorders. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13 (1), 96-105
• Müller, R.A. (2007) The study of autism as a distributed disorder. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13 (1), 85-95
• van der Lely H K. J. (2005). Domain-specific cognitive systems: Insight from Grammatical specific language impairment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 9 (2), 53-59 (copy here)

Reviews: Neuropsychiatry

ethanhein @ Flickr

Neuropsychiatry

• Kendler, K. S. (2005). Toward a Philosophical Structure for Psychiatry. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 433-440.
• Yudofsky S. C., & Hales E.H (2002). Neuropsychiatry and the Future of Psychiatry and Neurology. American Journal of Psychiatry, 159(8), 1261-1264.
• Price, B.H., Adams, R.D., & Coyle, J.T. (2000). Neurology and psychiatry: closing the great divide. Neurology, 54(1), 8-14.
• Martin, J. B. (2002). The Integration of Neurology, Psychiatry, and Neuroscience in the 21st Century. American Journal of Psychiatry, 159(5), 695 – 704.

Reviews: Social Psychology

simonbooth @ Flickr - Banksy's Kissing Policemen.
One of Banky's main tricks is to subvert deeply established stereotypes. In cognitive terms, we are extremely sensitive to this because it stands in such stark contrast to the stereotype - it is category-inconsistent.

Social

• Macrae, C. N., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93-120. (here)
  
• Bargh, J.A., & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462-479 (here)
  
• Bargh, J. A. (1999). The cognitive monster: The case against controllability of automatic stereotype effects. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford.
• Wenzlaff, R.M. & Wegner, D.M. (2000). Thought suppression. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 59–91. (here)

Reviews: Critical Issues

apoptotic @ Flickr

Critical Issues in Psychology

Wikipedia article on Philosopy of Science
Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. (2005). Conceptual foundations of evolutionary psychology. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 5-67). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. (copy here)

Ketelaar, T & Ellis, B.J (2000). Are Evolutionary Explanations Unfalsifiable? Evolutionary Psychology and the Lakatosian Philosophy of Science. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (1), 1-21
Controversies surrounding evolutionary psychology by Edward H. Hagen, Institute for Theoretical Biology, Berlin. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology (pp. 5-67). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. (copy here)
Laland, K.N. & Hoppitt, W., 2003. Do animals have culture? Evolutionary Anthropology, 12, pp. 150–159
Block, N. (1996). What is Functionalism? The Encyclopaedia of Philosophy Supplement. New York: MacMillan Reference Books
Nichols M.J. & Newsome, W.T. (1999) The neurobiology of cognition. Nature, 402, 35–38 (copy here)

Reviews

cidsoe @ Flickr

I'm pretty sure I promised a series of posts detailing good reviews. I think we can get that started today...

How to note: the review

(ttstam @ Flickr)

A review: the closest thing to a magic potion when revising

If you have done stage 1, you’ll know what a course is about before you dive into it.

I would say next on the agenda is to organise the course up into its different bits, leaving out anything you have decided to jettison. Now you have your work cut out.

Choose an area and head to PubMed (or alternative), type in the area you have settled on, add “+ review” on the end (e.g. “eating disorders + review”) and press 'Search'. Sort the results so as to have the most recent first.

With a bit of luck, what you'll have now is a review paper*. A review paper is an exciting thing; the more recent, the more exciting. It’s exciting because it means less work: someone much more familiar with the material has done all the legwork for you.

So, to carry on with the eating disorders (neuropsychiatry) example here's what I'd do:

One, I'd remind myself of the course blueprint, it’s all in the brain, but the brain isn’t everything. Two, as I read through the review paper, I'd have my senses sharpened to spot 'neural footprints'...it appears there is a lot of evidence showing right hemisphere damage. That’s something to note. But I'm also on the look out for more holistic explanations than this though. What is causing these right hemisphere lesions? There’s a load of stuff on methodology, and its at a grim level of detail. I’ll skim over that. Stuff on DSM-IV and how it’s being a bit behind, blah blah blah; interesting but irrelevant. Ah! A big juicy section on external causes…media effects…introduction of TV in a remote village causes increased incidence of eating disorders, that’s a good one!...both pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy seem to have efficacy...and so on.

Hopefully, you get the idea. Find a review, call to mind the course blueprint and allow it be a light. Note what it illuminates and ignore the dark bits.

*If there are no reviews available, find a few recent experimental papers; their introductions should act as mini-reviews. Compare and contrast though because that way you tease out the picture and cancel out the researchers’ selection bias.