[Avery Andrews 930123.1825]
I think the reviews & replies proposal is a great opportunity, but it
also carries a certain risk of getting clobbered again, since the usual
myths about feedback are probably all out there, & I don't think the
current range of PCT publications deals with them adequately. So I think
there's got to be some kind of `myths about feedback' article included
to function as a preface. Something along the lines of Bill's
`Objections to PCT posting' (covering feedback too slow and deafferentation),
but dressed in full academic battle gear.
It might be useful to point out that PCT is basically in the same camp
as the dynamics crowd (yes, Kugler, Turvey, etc.) as opposed to `orthodox'
computational cog. sci, if there actually is such a thing anymore (in
the sense that I suspect that nobody really sees it as The Truth
anymore, although there are people like me who think that a certain
amount of useful work can still be done from that point of view).
Something else that might be true, & if so, worth pointing out, is that
misunderstandings about feedback may well have directed research
into areas such as acquired skills that arguably involve a lot of
pre-programming, and away from rountine but non-stereotyped manipulative
activity.
Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au