Mind, Body, World- Foundations of Cognitive Science, 2013a

solution to the problem? For instance, we saw earlier that a computational theory
of language learning (identifying a grammar in the limit) might be used to motivate
possible properties that must be true of a language or a language learner.
The next step in a functional analysis is to decompose the function of interest
into a set of subcomponents that has three key properties. First, each subcomponent
is defined functionally, not physically. Second, each subcomponent is simpler
than the original function. Third, the organization of the subcomponents—the flow
of information from one component to another—is capable of producing the inputoutput
behaviour of the original function of interest. “Functional analysis consists in
analyzing a disposition into a number of less problematic dispositions such that the
programmed manifestation of these analyzing dispositions amounts to a manifestation
of the analyzed disposition” (Cummins, 1983, p. 28). These properties permit
the functional analysis to proceed in such a way that Ryle’s regress will be avoided,
and that eventually the homunculi produced by the analysis (i.e., the functional
subcomponents) can be discharged, as was discussed in Chapter 2.
The analytic stage of a functional analysis belongs to the algorithmic level of
analysis. This is because the organized system of subfunctions produced at this
stage is identical to a program or algorithm for producing the overall input-output
behaviour of the agent. However, the internal cognitive processes employed by the
agent cannot be directly observed. What methods can be used to carve up the agent’s
behaviour into an organized set of functions? In other words, how can observations
of behaviour support decisions about functional decomposition?
The answer to this question reveals why the analytic stage belongs to the algorithmic
level of analysis. It is because the empirical methods of cognitive psychology
are designed to motivate and validate functional decompositions.
For example, consider the invention that has become known as the modal model
of memory (Baddeley, 1986), which was one of the triumphs of cognitivism in the
1960s (Shiffrin & Atkinson, 1969; Waugh & Norman, 1965). According to this model,
to-be-remembered information is initially kept in primary memory, which has a
small capacity and short duration, and codes items acoustically. Without additional
processing, items will quickly decay from primary memory. However, maintenance
rehearsal, in which an item from memory is spoken aloud and thus fed back to the
memory in renewed form, will prevent this decay. With additional processing like
maintenance rehearsal, some of the items in primary memory pass into secondary
memory, which has large capacity and long duration, and employs a semantic code.
The modal memory model was inspired and supported by experimental data.
In a standard free-recall experiment, subjects are asked to remember the items from
a presented list (Glanzer & Cunitz, 1966; Postman & Phillips, 1965). The first few
items presented are better remembered than the items presented in the middle—
the primacy effect. Also, the last few items presented are better remembered than
120 Chapter 3