Transfer of Cognitive Skill: Actransfer
Key words: learning, skill acquisition, cognitive skills, brain training, Actransfer, ACT-R
Themes: e-science, cognitive modeling, Life-long learning
Is the whole of human cognitive ability an integrated system of knowledge, strategies and skills, or a collection of individual tasks and goals? Even though most people would gravitate towards the former point of view, the tradition of psychology, cognitive science and cognitive modeling adopts at least the research stance of the latter.
Formal discipline of the Mind or Identical Elements?
The discussion can be traced back to Thorndike (1902), who rejected the idea of a "formal discipline of the mind", and replaced it with the theory of identical elements. According to this theory, any ability we have is largely independent of other abilities, unless the two share identical elements of knowledge (Stimulus-Respons bonds in the time of Thorndike). Singley and Anderson (1985) introduced the modern version of this idea: transfer between individual skills is only possible if they share identical production rules.
Transfer, does it exist?
The current research tradition is to study individual skills and tasks with little regard for interactions between tasks. This is reinforced by many studies that demonstrate a lack of transfer, for example the well-known example in which subjects fail to solve a puzzle about a heart surgeon using a laser to remove a tumor after reading a story about a general who uses his army to concur the capital. Or the fact that even after taking a course in logic, students still fail to solve Wason's selection task.
From semantic to syntactic transfer
Most examples of failed transfer, however, play out on a semantic level, in which subjects fail to make the appropriate analogy, even if it is almost forced-fed into them. However, there are several experiments that do show transfer, but the transfer of knowledge seems to play out a more mechanical, syntactic level. In those experiments, subjects can perform or learn particular tasks faster because they have already learned a similar other task. Singley and Anderson's experiment of learning text editors is an example: it is easier to learn a new text editor if you have already mastered a different editor.
A new branch of more recent experiments have a similar structure, but focus on executive control. By training a particular control task, for example task switching, N-Back or working memory, subjects also improve on other executive control tasks, like the Stroop task.
To account for transfer, I have developed an extension to ACT-R that breaks down production rules into the smallest possible building blocks. Learning any skill leads to combinations of these building blocks, even though these combinations have no semantics of their own. They can be reused by other tasks and skills, and are therefore the basis for explaining transfer. Actransfer can explain transfer in Anderson and Singley's text editor study, and transfer in arithmetic. But Actransfer also offer explanations for the greater challenge: far transfer. In far transfer, the tasks involved have no surface characteristics in common, but nevertheless exhibit transfer. For example, training task switching leads to improvements on tests of working memory capacity and a decrease in Stroop interference. Actransfer can therefore help to evaluate the effectiveness of any kind of cognitive training that has the goal to improve general cognitive abilities.
Group leader: Niels Taatgen
Participating researchers: 3
Research programme: Cognitive Modeling
Research Institute: Bernoulli Institute
Faculty: Faculty of Science and Engineering
Graduate school: Graduate School of Science and Engineering (GSSE)
Collaboration: John R. Anderson, Wayne Gray
Funding: NASA, EU (FP7 Metalogue)
|Laatst gewijzigd:||03 maart 2020 14:51|