Efficient creativity: Constraint-guided conceptual combination

Cognitive Science

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 299-349

  Costello, Fintan J ^a   Keane, Mark T ^b  

^a DUBLIN CITY UNIVERSITY   (Ireland)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000310161     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog2402_4     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Barsalou L.W. Context - dependent and context - independent information in concepts. Memory & Cognition. 10:1982;82-93.
2. Bauer L. English word formation. 1983;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
3. Butler K. Content, context and compositionality. Mind & Language. 10:(1/2):1995;3-24.
4. Byrne R.M.J., Handley S.J. Reasoning strategies. Irish Journal of Psychology. 13:(2):1992;111-124.
5. Chater N., Lyon K., Myers T. Why are conjunctive categories overextended? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 16:(3):1990;497-508.
6. Cohen B., Murphy G.L. Models of concepts. Cognitive Science. 8:(1):1984;27-58.
7. Costello, F. J. (1997). Noun-noun conceptual combination: The polysemy of compound phrases. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Ireland.
8. Costello, F. J, & Keane, M. T. (1997). Polysemy in conceptual combination: Testing the constraint theory of combination. In Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (1997). Constraints on conceptual combination: A theory of polysemy in noun-noun combinations. Unpublished manuscript.
10. Costello, F. J., & Keane, M. T. (1998). Testing two theories of conceptual combination: Alignment versus diagnosticity in the comprehension and production of combined concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
11. Downing P. On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language. 53:(4):1977;810-842.
12. Falkenhainer B., Forbus K.D., Gentner D. Structure-mapping engine. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence. 1986;AAAI, Washington, DC.
13. Finin, T. (1980). The semantic interpretation of nominal compounds. In Proceedings of the First Annual Conference on Artificial Intelligence, University of Illinois: USA.
14. Fodor J., Lepore E. The red herring and the pet fish Why concepts still can't be prototypes . Cognition. 58:1996;253-270.
15. Gagné, C. L., & Shoben, E. J. (1997). Influence of thematic relations on the comprehension of modifier-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23(1), 71-87.
16. Gentner D., France M. The verb mutability effect studies of the combinatorial semantics of nouns and verbs . Small S.L., Cottrell G.W., Tanenhaus M.K. Lexical ambiguity resolution. 1988;Morgan Kaufman, Los Altos, CA.
17. Gentner D. Structure-mapping A theoretical framework for analogy . Cognitive Science. 7:1983;155-170.
18. Gerrig R.J., Murphy G.L. Contextual influences on the comprehension of complex concepts. Language and Cognitive Processes. 7:(3-4):1992;205-230.
19. Gleitman L.R., Gleitman H. Phrase & paraphrase. 1970;Academic Press, New York.
20. Gray K.C., Smith E.E. The role of instance retrieval in understanding complex concepts. Memory & Cognition. 23:1995;665-674.
21. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (Vol. 3). New York: Academic Press.
22. Hampton J.A. Inheritance of attributes in natural concept conjunctions. Memory and Cognition. 15:(1):1987;55-71.
23. Hampton, J. A. (1988). Overextension of conjunctive concepts: Evidence for a unitary model of concept typicality and class inclusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(1), 12-32.
24. Hampton, J. A. (1991). The combination of prototype concepts. In P. J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), The psychology of word meanings. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Holyoak K.J., Thagard P. Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cognitive Science. 13:(3):1989;295-355.
26. Johnson-Laird P.N., Schaeken W., Byrne R.M.J. Propositional reasoning by model. Psychological Review. 99:(3):1992;418-439.
27. Kamp H., Partee B. Prototype theory and compositionality. Cognition. 57:1995;129-191.
28. Kay P., Zimmer K. On the semantics of compounds and genitives in English. Sixth California Linguistics Association Proceedings. 1976;Campile Press, San Diego, CA.
29. Keane M. Analogical mechanisms. Artificial Intelligence Review. 2:1988;229-251.
30. Keane M.T. The cognitive processes underlying complex analogies Theoretical and empirical advances . Ricerche di Psicologia. 17:1993;9-36.
31. Keane M.T. On adaptation in analogy Tests of pragmatic-importance and adaptability in analogical problem solving . Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 49A:1996;1062-1085.
32. Keane M.T. What makes an analogy difficult? The effects of order and causal structure on analogical mapping . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition. 23:1997;946-967.
33. Keane M.T., Ledgeway T., Duff S. Constraints on analogical mapping A comparison of three models . Cognitive Science. 18:1994;387-438.
34. Komatsu L.K. Recent views of conceptual structure. Psychological Bulletin. 112:(3):1992;500-526.
35. Kunda Z., Miller D.T., Claire T. Combining social concepts The role of causal reasoning . Cognitive Science. 14:1990;551-577.
36. Lees, R. B. (1970). Problems in the grammatical analysis of English nominal compounds. In Manfred Bierwisch & Karl E. Heidolph (Eds.), Progress in linguistics. The Hauge: Mouton.
37. Levi J.N. The syntax and semantics of complex nominals. 1978;Academic Press, New York.
38. Markman A.B., Gentner D. Splitting the differences A structural alignment view of similarity . Journal of Memory and Language. 32:(4):1993;517-535.
39. Markman A.B., Wisniewski E.J. Same and different The differentiation of basic-level categories . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Language, Memory & Cognition. 23:1997;54-70.
40. Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
41. Medin D.L., Shoben E.J. Context and structure in conceptual combination. Cognitive Psychology. 20:(2):1988;158-190.
42. Murphy G.L. Comprehending complex concepts. Cognitive Science. 12:(4):1988;529-562.
43. Murphy G.L. Noun phrase interpretation and conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language. 29:(3):1990;259-288.
44. Murphy G.L., Medin D.L. The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review. 92:1985;289-316.
45. Osherson D.N., Smith E.E., Wilkie O., López A., Shafir E. Category-based induction. Psychological Review. 97:(2):1990;185-200.
46. Palmer S.E. Levels of description in information processing theories of analogy. Vosniadou S., Ortony A. Similarity and analogical reasoning. 1989;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England.
47. Potter M.C., Falconer A. Understanding noun phrases. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour. 18:1979;509-521.
48. Rips L.J. The current status of research on concept combination. Mind & Language. 10:(1/2):1995;72-104.
49. Rosch E. Principles of categorization. Rosch E., Lloyd B.B. Cognition and categorization. 1978;Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
50. Schaeken W., Byrne R.M.J., Johnson-Laird P.N. A comparison of conditional and disjunctive inferences a case-study of the mental model theory of reasoning . Psychologica Belgica. 35:(1):1995;57-70.
51. Shoben E.J. Non-predicating conceptual combinations. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. 29:1993;391-409.
52. Shoben E.J., Gagné C.L. Thematic relations and the creation of combined concepts. Ward T.B., Smith S.M., Vaid J. Creative thought An investigation of conceptual structures and processes . 1997;American Psychological Association, Washington DC.
53. Simmons D. A prolegomena to any future metaphysics of Poppy. Brite P.Z. Swamp foetus. 1995;9-20 Penguin, Middlesex, England.
54. Smith E.E., Medin D.L. Categories and concepts. 1981;Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
55. Smith E.E., Osherson D.N., Rips L.J., Keane M. Combining prototypes A selective modification model . Cognitive Science. 12:1988;485-527.
56. Smyth B., Keane M.T. Retrieving reusable designs. Knowledge Based Systems. 9:1996;127-135.
57. Smyth B., Keane M.T. Adaptation guided-retrieval Questioning the similarity assumption in reasoning . Artificial Intelligence. 104:1998;1-45.
58. Sperber D., Wilson D. Relevance Communication and cognition . 1986;Blackwell, Oxford.
59. Springer K., Murphy G.L. Feature availability in conceptual combination. Psychological Science. 3:(2):1992;111-117.
60. Tversky A. Features of similarity. Psychological Review. 84:1977;327-352.
61. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Extensional versus intuitive reasoning The conjunction fallacy in probability judgement . Psychological Review. 90:1983;293-315.
62. Veale, T., & Keane, M. T. (1994). Belief modeling, intentionality, and perlocution in metaphor comprehension. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Atlanta, GA. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
63. Veale, T., & Keane, M. T. (1997). The competence of sub-optimal structure mapping on hard analogies. Paper presented at the fifteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
64. Wisniewski E.J. Construal and similarity in conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language. 35:(3):1996;434-453.
65. Wisniewski E.J. Conceptual combination Possibilities and esthetics . Ward T.B., Smith S.M., Vaid J. Creative thought An investigation of conceptual structures and processes . 1997;American Psychological Association, Washington DC.
66. Wisniewski E.J. When concepts combine. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 4:(2):1997;167-183.
67. Wisniewski E.J., Gentner D. On the combinatorial semantics of noun pairs Minor and major adjustments to meaning . Simpson G.B. Understanding word and sentence. 1991;North Holland, Amsterdam.
68. Wisniewski E.J., Love B.C. Relations versus properties in conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language. 38:1998;177-202.
69. Wisniewski, E. J. & Markman, A. B. (1993). The role of structural alignment in conceptual combination. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Boulder, CO.