On the generality and limits of abstraction in rats and humans

In this review, we address the question, central to cognition, of whether nonhuman animals such as rats are capable of extracting and extending information from a given learning situation to a new learning situation without generalizing through a physical dimension of the stimuli. This capacity underlies abstraction, which is a hallmark of human cognition and necessary for complex information processing such as language acquisition. We selectively review recent experiments with rats in which systematic changes in information processing of new stimuli are observed after training with different stimuli. These results strongly suggest that this capacity is present in rats. We also review two articles in which clear limitations to this capacity are detected. We conclude that, within specified limits, rats are capable of using prior experience when faced with a learning situation that involves new stimuli. We interpret this ability as a rudimentary form of abstraction. In the face of these provocative results, new theories of learning should be designed to account for these findings.     

The argument from almost indiscernibles

What I call the argument from almost indiscernibles is an argument, put forward by Robert Adams in 1979, for the possibility of indiscernibles based on the possibility of almost indiscernibles. The argument is that if almost indiscernibles are possible, indiscernibles are possible, but since almost indiscernible are possible, indiscernibles are possible. The argument seems to be an improvement over the mere appeal to intuitions, like that suggested by Max Black, that situations in which there are indiscernibles are possible, for the argument purports to give us a reason that indiscernibles are possible. In this paper I shall assess the argument by examining whether there is support for the conditional premise that if almost indiscernibles are possible, indiscernibles are possible. I shall argue that there are reasons to think that either the premise lacks support or almost indiscernibles are dispensable. If the premise lacks support, the argument does not establish the possibility of almost indiscernibles; if almost indiscernibles are dispensable, the argument is not needed to establish the possibility of indiscernibles.     

Instruction Modes for Motor Control Skills Acquisition: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract

The objective was to compare two different instruction modes used to teach patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP) to perform a lumbar motor control task. The three intervention instruction modes used were: common verbal explanation of a motor task based on a motor control therapeutic exercise (MCTE-control group), MTCE instructed using motor imagery (MI) and MCTE instructed using tactile feedback (TF). The main outcome measure was lumbar motor control of the neutral position test. Forty-eight patients with CLBP were randomly allocated into three groups of 16 patients per group. The MI strategy was the most effective mode for developing the motor control task in an accurate and controlled manner, obtaining better outcomes than TF or verbal instruction.