Behavioral and Brain Sciences

Table of Contents - 2008 - Volume 31, Issue 02  

Open Peer Commentary

Ontogeny, phylogeny, and the relational reinterpretation hypothesis

Elizabeth V. Hallinana1 and Valerie A. Kuhlmeiera1

a1 Department of Psychology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada. 5evh@queensu.ca vk4@queensu.ca www.infantcognitiongroup.com

Abstract

If our knowledge of human cognition were based solely on research with participants younger than the age of 2 years, there would be no basis for the relational reinterpretation hypothesis, and Darwin's continuity theory would be safe as houses. Because many of the shortcomings cited apply to human infants, we propose how a consideration of cognitive development would inform the relational reinterpretation hypothesis.

Related Articles

    Darwin's mistake: Explaining the discontinuity between human and nonhuman minds Derek C. Penn, Keith J. Holyoak and Daniel J. Povinelli Department of Psychology, University of California–Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095; Cognitive Evolution Group, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504 dcpenn@ucla.edu http://reasoninglab.psych.ucla.edu/ http://www.cognitiveevolutiongroup.org/; Department of Psychology, University of California–Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095 holyoak@lifesci.ucla.edu http://reasoninglab.psych.ucla.edu/; Cognitive Evolution Group, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504 ceg@louisiana.edu http://www.cognitiveevolutiongroup.org/