Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
1 sur 2
http://web.stanford.edu/group/SHR/4-1/text/miall.commentary.html
24/12/2014 17:41
2 sur 2
http://web.stanford.edu/group/SHR/4-1/text/miall.commentary.html
is procrastinating over bringing justice to Elsinore. What we do not know is what the action of the play as
a whole means; for that, we have to create our own understanding (and the proliferation of critical
interpretations of Hamlet suggests that we are each likely do this in our own terms). As we do so, we go
beyond any of the schemas that we first called up to locate the "context" of the play and understand the
"problem" it presents.
The cognitive mechanisms involved in instantiating and elaborating schemas are relatively well
understood, but we have very little understanding of how a schema is created, as Vosniadou and Brewer
(1987) have pointed out. In fact, the outcome of the process of responding to a literary text is probably
only poorly represented by such a notion as a schema, if this concept is still tied to the cognitive science
paradigm. The outcome of an effective response to Hamlet probably involves a range of phenomena, from
the physiological to issues of identity and culture. What is required, if progress is to be made, is attention
to all the phenomena that may be implicated in the process of reading literary texts and an ability to
perceive the transformation processes at work in going beyond the initial schemas of the reader.[1]
Given the little attention paid to the literary response process by psychologists (more attention, however,
than from the AI community), we have the proliferation of theories about literature of which Simon
complains but almost no working knowledge of how the response process functions or even what tools we
might bring to bear on studying it. In this situation a bottom-up approach is likely to be more effective: let
us set ourselves to collect all the information that we can from as many different kinds of readers as we
can about what is actually taking place during literary reading. No instrument of data collection is free of
theoretical presuppositions, as we all know, but by attending as directly as possible to the phenomena of
reading we may begin to perceive patterns that go beyond our existing preconceptions.
And it is here, once we have collected our data, that we should call upon the expertise of our colleagues in
AI. Whether we employ the algorithms of machine learning, Bayesian logic, or some other heuristic, what
AI also offers in various intelligent systems is the ability to perceive patterns within a complex,
multivariate field of data. By taking a given text and contributing to the analysis all that we know about
the style and structure of the text, as well as all that a range of readers can tell us under various conditions
about their responses to that text, we may discover some of the underlying determinants of literary
reading. I would invite Professor Simon to lend his expertise and his interest in literary issues to this
undertaking.[2]
Previous Next Up Comments
Notes
1. This view is developed in (Miall, 1989) and (Miall and Kuiken, in press).
2. For a fuller account of this possibility, see (Miall, 1993: 333-339).
24/12/2014 17:41