Title |
Active inference, enactivism and the hermeneutics of social cognition
|
---|---|
Published in |
Synthese, November 2016
|
DOI | 10.1007/s11229-016-1269-8 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Shaun Gallagher, Micah Allen |
Abstract |
We distinguish between three philosophical views on the neuroscience of predictive models: predictive coding (associated with internal Bayesian models and prediction error minimization), predictive processing (associated with radical connectionism and 'simple' embodiment) and predictive engagement (associated with enactivist approaches to cognition). We examine the concept of active inference under each model and then ask how this concept informs discussions of social cognition. In this context we consider Frith and Friston's proposal for a neural hermeneutics, and we explore the alternative model of enactivist hermeneutics. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 9 | 13% |
United Kingdom | 9 | 13% |
Denmark | 5 | 7% |
Japan | 4 | 6% |
Netherlands | 3 | 4% |
Germany | 3 | 4% |
Canada | 3 | 4% |
Italy | 2 | 3% |
Switzerland | 2 | 3% |
Other | 4 | 6% |
Unknown | 26 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 46 | 66% |
Scientists | 21 | 30% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 265 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Japan | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
Portugal | 1 | <1% |
Luxembourg | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 261 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 22% |
Researcher | 43 | 16% |
Student > Master | 42 | 16% |
Student > Bachelor | 19 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 6% |
Other | 49 | 18% |
Unknown | 39 | 15% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Psychology | 58 | 22% |
Philosophy | 34 | 13% |
Neuroscience | 34 | 13% |
Social Sciences | 19 | 7% |
Arts and Humanities | 15 | 6% |
Other | 53 | 20% |
Unknown | 52 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2022.
All research outputs
#955,976
of 25,303,733 outputs
Outputs from Synthese
#49
of 2,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,443
of 429,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Synthese
#3
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,303,733 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 429,628 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.