Rights statement: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=BBS The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31 (3), pp 321-356 2008, © 2008 Cambridge University Press.
Final published version, 829 KB, PDF document
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Editorial › peer-review
| <mark>Journal publication date</mark> | 06/2008 |
|---|---|
| <mark>Journal</mark> | Behavioral and Brain Sciences |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Volume | 31 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Pages (from-to) | 345-356 |
| Publication Status | Published |
| <mark>Original language</mark> | English |
In this response, we consider four main issues arising from the commentaries to the target article. These include further details of the theory of interactive specialization, the relationship between neuroconstructivism and selectionism, the implications of neuroconstructivism for the notion of representation, and the role of genetics in theories of development. We conclude by stressing the importance of multidisciplinary approaches in the future study of cognitive development and by identifying the directions in which neuroconstructivism can expand in the Twenty-first Century.