ARTÍCULOS

 

Convergencias conceptuales entre las teorías del aprendizaje implícito y la Psicología Evolucionista

 

Conceptual convergences between implicit learning theories and the Evolucionary Psychology

 

 

María Fernanda López-Ramón^* y Gustavo Fernández Acevedo^**

* Doctora en Psicología. Becaria Post-doctoral del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET). Gascón 1676 - 6º Piso Dpto. A - (7600) Mar del Plata, Provincia de Buenos Aires - República Argentina. E-Mail: mariafernandalopezramon@gmail.com
** Licenciado en Psicología y Doctor en Filosofía. Profesor Adjunto de la cátedra Introducción a la Investigación Psicológica de la Facultad de Psicología de la Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP).

 

 

---

RESUMEN

El objetivo del presente artículo es contribuir a la integración teórica entre dos perspectivas de amplia difusión y desarrollo actual: las teorías sobre el aprendizaje implícito (AI) y el programa de investigación conocido como Psicología Evolucionista (PE). Se propone la existencia de una base teórica común entre el AI y la PE que incluye: una perspectiva adaptacionista, que sostiene que las estructuras y mecanismos, procesos y conductas necesitan ser integrados dentro de un marco evolucionista y evaluados en términos de los roles que cada uno juega en las especies que los poseen; un innatismo moderado, que admite la existencia de una estructura considerable no dependiente del ambiente y por último, un acuerdo acerca del carácter adaptativo y no reductible de la conciencia. Por el contrario, se considera que no forma parte de los compromisos compartidos la tesis del carácter masivamente modular de la mente.

Palabras clave: Aprendizaje implícito - Psicología Evolucionista - Compatibilidad - Integración.

---

ABSTRACT

Throughout the years, a wide range of systems, trends, schools of thought and paradigms have fought to become researchers’ and professionals’ number one field of study. In Psychology, however, competing has only produced noticeable theoretic dispersion. The aim of the present article is to contribute to the discussion on theoretical integration by analyzing conceptual convergences between two widely circulating perspectives that are also under current development: the theories of implicit learning (IL) and a research program known as Evolutionary Psychology (EP). Both theories have gradually gained increasing importance among current theory trends. The theories of implicit learning, on one hand, have evolved based on empirical data and have revealed their presence in different experimental paradigms and among diverse populations. On the other hand, over the past few years EP has achieved considerable relevance in the theoretic framework, and has provided evolutionary explanations about a great deal of psychological phenomena. In the first two sections we briefly describe the general characteristics of IL and EP, in order to later analyze possible convergences between both perspectives. Firstly, we show the main conceptual principles of IL based on the analysis made by Frensch who classifies the main existing definitions according to different topics: the stimuli that are involved in the acquisition context, the phenomenological character of the process, the structure complexity of implicit learning content, the existing relationship between IL and neural mechanisms that are different from those in explicit learning, and the functional relationship between IL and attention mechanisms. In the second section, we identify three main theoretical aspects of Evolutionary Psychology: the adjustment assumption (according to which mental systems have emerged basically as features that contribute to an organism’s successful reproduction); computational modularity hypothesis (the computation systems that make up the mind are relatively autonomous, they work on a specific purpose and solve very limited kinds of problems); and the innate assumption (that states that mental systems are innate and are determined by a genetic program structure). In the third section we describe some attempts at integrating research on implicit learning within an evolutionary framework. We describe Reber's assumptions on implicit learning which suggest that it is an earlier and more basic phylogenetic type of learning than explicit learning; furthermore we examine their relationship with the comprehensive model of Donald's cognitive evolution. In the fourth section, we particularly examine theoretical convergences between IL and EP theories. We believe that there is a common theoretic base between both perspectives. This theoretical base implies accepting a perspective based on an adaptation framework, supported by the fundamental principles of implicit processes and from an innate position. We believe that the massive modularity assumption does not form part of the conceptual commitments in implicit learning theories, even if it does not turn out to be incompatible with these. Finally, in the conclusions, we summarize our main findings, as well as discuss, from an epistemological framework, the advantages that the theoretical compatibilities hold. We examine different paths to reach a conceptual convergence: theoretical reduction, the unification of a set of minor theories which make up another theory that integrates and surpasses previous ones, as well as the integration of two theoretic bodies that were not connected up to that moment and that account to different theoretic authorities. Given that the potential convergence between Evolutionary psychology and implicit learning does not adjust to any of the aforementioned models, we consider it as a special case of integration.

Keywords: Implicit learning - Evolutionary Psychology - Compatibility - Integration.

---

 

 

Texto completo

 

Referencias bibliográficas

1 Barkow, J., Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (Eds.). (1992). The adapted mind. Evolutionary Psychology and the generation of culture. NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

2 Barrett, C. & Fiddick, L. (1999). Evolution and risky decisions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 251-252.        [ Links ]

3 Berry, D.C. & Broadbent, D.E. (1984). On the relationship between task performance and associated verbalizable knowledge. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 209-231.        [ Links ]

4 Bickle, J. (1995). Psychoneural reduction of the genuinely cognitive: Some accomplished facts. Philosophical Psychology, 8(3), 265-285.         [ Links ]

5 Büchner, A. & Wippich, W. (1998). Differences and commonalties between implicit learning and implicit memory. En M. Stadler & P. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 3-40). California: Sage Publications.        [ Links ]

6 Bunge, M. (2003). Emergencia y convergencia. Novedad cualitativa y unidad del conocimiento [Emergence and convergence: qualitative novelty and the unity of knowledge]. Barcelona: Gedisa.         [ Links ]

7 Buss, D. (1992). Mate preference mechanism: Consequences for partner choice and intrasexual competition. En J. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind.Evolutionary Psychology and the generation of culture (Cap. 5). NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

8 Buss, D. (1995). Evolutionary Psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Psychological Inquiry, 6(1), 1-30.        [ Links ]

9 Calhoun, L. (2004). The unification of psychology: A noble quest. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60(12), 1283-1289.        [ Links ]

10 Caporael, L. (2001). Evolutionary Psychology: Toward a unifying theory and a hybrid science. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 607-628.         [ Links ]

11 Chao, R. (2001). Seeing the forest and seeing the trees in psychology. American Psychologist, 56, 1128-1129.        [ Links ]

12 Chovan, W. (2001). Theory knitting reconsidered. American Psychologist, 56, 1127-1128.         [ Links ]

13 Cleeremans, A. & McClelland, J.L. (1991). Learning the structure of event sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 235-253.        [ Links ]

14 Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. En J. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind. Evolutionary Psychology and thegeneration of culture (Cap. 3). NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

15 Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (1997). Evolutionary Psychology: A primer. University of California, Center for Evolutionary Psychology. Recuperado el 25 de febrero de 2003 de
http://www.psych.ucsb.edu/research/cep/primer.html

16 Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. (2000). Evolutionary Psychology and the emotions. En M. Lewis & J.M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions, (2da. ed., Cap. 7). NY: Guilford.         [ Links ]

17 Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicidio [Homicide]. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.        [ Links ]

18 Dennet, D. (1995). Darwin’s dangerous idea. NY: Simon and Schuster.

19 Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind: Three stages in the evolution of culture and cognition. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: Harvard University Press.        [ Links ]

20 Durrant, R. & Ellis, B.J. (2003). Evolutionary Psychology. En M. Gallagher & R.J. Nelson (Eds.), Comprehensive handbook of Psychology (Vol. 3): Biological Psychology (Cap. 1). NY: Wiley.        [ Links ]

21 Fendrich, D.W., Healy, A.F. & Bourne, L.E. (1991). Long-term repetition effects for motoric and perceptual procedures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(1), 137-151.        [ Links ]

22 Fodor, J. (1998). The trouble with psychological darwinism [versión electrónica]. London Review of Books, 20(2). Recuperado el 27 de junio de 2005 de http://www.lrb.co.uk/v20/n02/fodo01_.html         [ Links ]

23 Frensch, P.A. (1998). One concept, multiple meanings. En M. Stadler & P. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 3-40). California: Sage Publications.        [ Links ]

24 Gould, S.J. (1997). Evolution: The pleasures of pluralism [versión electrónica]. New York Review of Books, 44(1). Recuperado el 15 de octubre de 2004 de http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Debate/Gould.html        [ Links ]

25 Hagen, E.H. (1999). The functions of postpartum depression. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 325-359.         [ Links ]

26 Henriques, G. (2003). The tree of knowledge system and the theoretical unification of Psychology. Review of General Psychology, 7(2), 150-182.         [ Links ]

27 Henriques, G. (2004). Psychology defined. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 1207-1221.         [ Links ]

28 Kassinove, J. (2001). As defined, unification is inevitable. American Psychologist, 56, 1127.         [ Links ]

29 Kemeny, J. & Oppenheim, P. (1956). On reduction. Philosophical Studies, 7, 6-19.        [ Links ]

30 Kendler, H. (2001). Romantic versus realistic views of Psychology. American Psychologist, 56, 1125-1126.        [ Links ]

31 Kennair, L.E.O. (2002). Evolutionary Psychology: An emerging integrative perspective within the science and practice of psychology. Human Nature Review, 2, 17-61.         [ Links ]

32 Knowlton, B.J. & Squire, L.R. (1992). Intact prototype learning by amnesic patients: Evidence for parallel learning of item-specific and general information. Society forNeuroscience Abstracts, 18, 168.        [ Links ]

33 Kurzban, R. (2002). Alas, poor evolutionary psychology: Unfairly accused, unjustly condemned. Human Nature Review, 2, 99-109.        [ Links ]

34 Lau, M. (2001). Postmodernism and the values of science. American Psychologist, 56, 1126-1127.         [ Links ]

35 Lewicki, P., Czyzewska, M. & Hoffman, H. (1987). Unconscious acquisition of complex procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 523-530.         [ Links ]

36 Lewicki, P., Hill, T. & Sasaki, I. (1989). Self-perpetuating development of encoding biases. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 323-337.        [ Links ]

37 MacDonald, K. (1996). What do children want? An evolutionary perspective on children’s motivation in the peer group. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 19, 53&-73.

38 MacDonald, K. (1998). Evolution and development. En A. Campbell & S. Muncer (Eds.), Social Development, (pp. 21-49). London: UCL Press.         [ Links ]

39 Mathews, R.C. & Cochran, B.P. (1998). Proyect grammarama revised. En M. Stadler & P. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 223-259). California: Sage Publications.        [ Links ]

40 Mathews, R.C., Buss, R.R., Stanley, W.B., Blanchard-Fields, F., Cho, J.R. & Druhan, B.B. (1989). Role of implicit and explicit processes in learning from examples: A synergistic effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1083-1100.        [ Links ]

41 Mealey, L. (1995). The Sociobiology of sociopathy: An integrated evolutionary model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18, 523-541.         [ Links ]

42 Nagel, E. (1961). La estructura de la ciencia [The structure of science]. Barcelona: Paidós.         [ Links ]

43 Nesse, R. (1998). Emotional disorders in evolutionary perspective. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 71, 397-415.        [ Links ]

44 Panksepp, J. & Panksepp, J.B. (2000). The seven sins of evolutionary Psy­chology. Evolution and Cognition, 6, 108-131.        [ Links ]

45 Perruchet, P. & Vinter, A. (1998). Learning and development. En M. Stadler & P. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 495-531). Londres: Sage.        [ Links ]

46 Pinker, S. & Bloom, P. (1992). Natural language and natural selection. En J. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind. Evolutionary Psychology and the generation of culture (Cap. 12). NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

47 Pinker, S. (1997). Cómo funciona la mente [How the mind works]. Barcelona: Destino.        [ Links ]

48 Popper, K. (1972). El objeto de la ciencia [The aim of science]. En K. Popper (Ed.), Conocimiento objetivo. Madrid: Tecnos.        [ Links ]

49 Price, P.C., Meyer, D.E. & Koh, K. (1992). Multivariate function learning: Applications of the adaptive regression model to intuitive physic. Proceedings of the 14th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 552-557). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

50 Reber, A.S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219-235.        [ Links ]

51 Reber, A.S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. An essay on the cognitive unconscious. NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

52 Rozin, P. (1976). The evolution of intelligence and access to the cognitive unconscious. Progress in Psychobiology and Physiological Psychology, 6, 245-280.        [ Links ]

53 Sanders, R.E., Gonzalez, E.G., Murphy, M.D., Liddle, C.L. & Vitina, J.R. (1987). Frequency of occurrence and the criteria for automatic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 241-250.        [ Links ]

54 Seger, C.A. (1994). Implicit learning. Psychological Bulletin, 2, 163-196.        [ Links ]

55 Seger, C.A. (1998). Multiple forms of implicit learning. En M. Stadler & P. Frensch (Eds.), Handbook of implicit learning (pp. 3-40). California: Sage Publications.        [ Links ]

56 Shanks, D.R. & St. John, M.F. (1994). Characteristics of dissociable human learning systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 367-447.        [ Links ]

57 Sherry, D.F., & Schacter, D.L. (1987). The evolution of multiple memory systems. Psychological Review, 94, 439-454.        [ Links ]

58 Squire, L.N. (1986). Mechanisms of memory. Science, 232, 1612-1619.        [ Links ]

59 Staats, A. (1999). Unifying Psychology requires new infrastructure, theory, method, and a research agenda. Review of General Psychology, 3(1), 3-13.        [ Links ]

60 Stadler, M.A. & Frensch, P.A. (1994). Whither learning, whither memory? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 423-424.        [ Links ]

61 Stam, H. (2004). Unifying Psychology: Epistemological act or disciplinary maneuver? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 1259-1262.         [ Links ]

62 Stricker, G. (2004). The unification of Psychology and psychological organizations. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 1267-1269.         [ Links ]

63 Symons, D. (1992). On the use and misuse of darwinism in the study of human behavior. En J. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind. EvolutionaryPsychology and the generation of culture. (Cap. 2). NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

64 Tattersall, I. (2001). Evolution, genes, and behavior. Zygon, 36, 657-666.        [ Links ]

65 Tooby, J. & Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. En J. Barkow, L. Cosmides & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind. Evolutionary Psychology and the generation of culture (Cap.1). NY: Oxford University Press.        [ Links ]

66 Tulving, E. & Schacter, D.L. (1990). Priming and human memory systems. Science, 247, 301-306.        [ Links ]

67 Viney, W. (2004). Pluralism in the sciences is not easily dismissed. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 1275-1278.         [ Links ]

68 Weinberg, S. (1993). El sueño de una teoría final. La búsqueda de las leyes fundamentales de la naturaleza [Dreams of a final theory. The search for the fundamentals laws of nature]. Barcelona: Crítica.        [ Links ]

69 Willingham, D.B., Nissen, M.J. & Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 1047-1060.        [ Links ]

70 Wright, R. (1994). The moral animal. NY: Vintage Books.         [ Links ]

 

 

Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) - Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata (UNMdP) - Mar del Plata - Buenos Aires - República Argentina.

Fecha de recepción: 7 de mayo de 2007
Fecha de aceptación: 15 de agosto de 2007