|
|
Stan Franklin & Bernard Baars
Two
varieties of unconscious processing
Stan Franklin and Bernard Baars
In:-
New Horizons in the Neuroscience of Consciousness – Eds. Elaine Perry,
Daniel
Collerton, Fiona LeBeau & Heather Ashton
The authors distinguish
between
two forms of the unconscious, processing that is unconscious, but could
become
conscious, and processing that is never conscious. Material is argued to
be
capable of becoming conscious if it is relevant for determining what is
the
most important aspect of the environment for the subject to attend to.
Conscious and unconscious brain processing appears to be very similar.
The
thinking here is based on Baar's global workspace theory for cognitive
processing and consciousness dating from the late 1980s although
extended in more
recent years. The theory is rather abstract talking in terms of a
distributed
parallel systems and competition for attention between coalitions of
neurons. However
in terms of modern studies this can be related to spatially distributed
neuronal assemblies oscillating in the gamma range that signal between
different regions of the cortex, and appear to be necessary for
consciousness.
The basic feature of the global workspace system is the cognitive cycle
of
sensing, processing and action. The cycle starts with external sensory
stimuli.
A percept is assembled unconsciously and passed to the workspace, where
it is
matched up with relevant memories to produce a model of the subject's
situation. Portions of this model are supposed to compete for attention
in
consciousness. Consciousness subsequently broadcasts mainly to
procedural
memory to select a suitable behaviour.
Except for the compatibility
of
parallel processing with more recent gamma frequency theory, global
workspace
looks very characteristic of twentieth century consciousness theory. The
description of what is supposed to happen is extremely abstract with
hardly any
reference to where in the brain any of this is taking place. The
reference to a
conscious broadcast is particularly opaque in this respect.
The other
characteristically twentieth century aspect of this theory is the
complete
absence of any reference to the emotional areas of the brain, the system
apparently being driven by a purely cognitive cycle. Modern studies have
indicated the importance of assessing the reward/punisher value of
possible
actions, and both subcortical and prefrontal responses to this
assessment,
which can guide behaviour and also react back on cognitive processing.
All this
appears to be left out in global workspace theory.
|
|