dc.contributorEscolas::EBAPE
dc.contributorFGV
dc.creatorLinhares, Alexandre
dc.creatorFreitas, Anna Elizabeth Tavares de Araújo
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-25T18:23:48Z
dc.date.available2018-10-25T18:23:48Z
dc.date.created2018-10-25T18:23:48Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier0732-118X
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10438/25355
dc.identifier10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.008
dc.identifier2-s2.0-70350575745
dc.description.abstractPattern recognition lies at the heart of the cognitive science endeavor. In this paper, we provide some criticism of this notion, using studies of chess as an example. The game of chess is, as significant evidence shows, a game of abstractions: pressures; force; open files and ranks; time; tightness of defense; old strategies rapidly adapted to new situations. These ideas do not arise on current computational models, which apply brute force by rote-memorization. In this paper we assess the computational models of CHREST and CHUMP, and argue that chess chunks must contain semantic information. This argument leads to a new and contrasting claim, as we propose that key conclusions of Chase and Simon's (1973) influential study stemmed from a non-sequitur. In the concluding section, we propose a shift in philosophy, from 'pattern recognition' to a framework of 'experience recognition'. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationNew Ideas in Psychology
dc.rightsrestrictedAccess
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAnalogy
dc.subjectCognitive Models
dc.subjectCognitive Psychology
dc.subjectExperience Recognition
dc.subjectExperimental Psychology
dc.subjectMemory
dc.subjectPerception
dc.titleQuestioning Chase and Simon's (1973) 'Perception in Chess': The 'experience recognition' hypothesis
dc.typeArticle (Journal/Review)


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución