Artifacts are not ascribed essences, nor are they treated as belonging to kinds

Language and Cognitive Processes

Volumn 18, Issue 5-6, 2003, Pages 563-582

  Sloman, Steven A ^a   Malt, Barbara C ^b  

^a BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b LEHIGH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFACT; COGNITION; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DECISION MAKING; LANGUAGE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REVIEW; THEORY;

EID: 0242490940     PISSN: 01690965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01690960344000035     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Ahn, W. (1998). Why are different features central for natural kinds and artifacts? The role of causal status in determining feature centrality. Cognition, 69, 135-178.
2. Ahn, W-K., Kalish, C., Gelman, S.A., Medin, D.L., Luhmann, C., Atran, S., Coley, J.D., & Shafto, P. (2001). Why essences are essential in the psychology of concepts. Cognition, 82, 59-69.
3. Ashby, F.G. (1992). Multidimensional models of categorization. In F.G. Ashby (Ed.). Multidimensional models of perception and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Barsalou, L.W., Sloman, S.A., & Chaigneau, S.E. (in press). The HIPE theory of function. In L. Carlson & E. van der Zee (Eds.), Representing functional features for language and space: Insights from perception, categorization and development. New York: Oxford University.
5. Bloom, P. (1996). Intention, history, and artifact concepts. Cognition, 60, 1-29.
6. Brennan, S.E., & Clark, H.H. (1996). Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1482-1493.
7. Chaigneau, S.E. (2002). Studies in the conceptual structure of object function. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
8. Farrar, M.J., Raney, G.E., & Boyer, M.E. (1992). Knowledge, concepts, and inferences in childhood. Child Development, 63, 673-691.
9. Gelman, S.A. (1988). The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 65-95.
10. Gelman, S.A., & Bloom, P. (2000). Young children are sensitive to how an object was created when deciding what to name it. Cognition, 76, 91-103.
11. Gelman, S.A., & Hirschfeld, L.A. (1999). How biological is essentialism? In D.L. Medin & S. Atran (Eds.), Folkbiology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Gelman, S.A., & Markman, E.M. (1986). Categories and induction in young children. Cognition, 23, 183-209.
13. Gennari, S.P., Sloman, S.A., Malt, B.C., & Fitch, W.T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83, 49-79.
14. Hampton, J.A. (1995). Testing the prototype theory of concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 686-708.
15. Heit, E., & Rubinstein, J. (1994). Similarity and property effects in inductive reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 411-422.
16. Keil, F.C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Keil, F.C. (1995). The growth of causal understanding of natural kinds. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, & A.J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 234-262). New York: Oxford University Press.
18. Kripke, S. (1972). Naming and necessity. In D. Davidson & G. Harman (Eds.), Semantics of natural language (pp. 253-355). Dordrecht, Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing.
19. Kronenfeld, D.B., Armstrong, J.D., & Wilmoth, S. (1985). Exploring the internal structure of linguistic categories: An extensionist semantic view. In J.W.D. Dougherty (Ed.), Directions in cognitive anthropology (pp. 91-113). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
20. Kruschke, J.K. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. Psychological Review, 99, 22-44.
21. Landau, B., Smith, L., & Jones, S. (1998). Object shape, object function, and object name. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 1-27.
22. López, A., Atran, S., Coley, J.D., Medin, D.L., & Smith E.E. (1997). The tree of life: Universal and cultural features of folkbiological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 251-295.
23. Mak, B.S.K. & Vera, A. (1999). Motion-based categorization in young children. Cognition, 71, B11-B21.
24. 2O. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 41-70.
25. Malt, B.C. (1995). Category coherence in cross-cultural perspective. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 85-148.
26. Malt, B.C., & Johnson, E.C. (1992). Do artifact concepts have cores? Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 195-217.
27. Malt, B.C., & Sloman, S.A. (2001). Beyond conceptual pacts: Enduring influences on lexical choice in conversation. Manuscript under review.
28. Malt, B.C., Sloman, S.A., Gennari, S.P., Shi, M., & Wang, Y. (1999). Knowing versus naming: Similarity and the linguistic categorization of artifacts. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 230-262.
29. Mandler, J.M., & McDonough, L. (1998). Studies in inductive inference in infancy. Cognitive Psychology, 37, 60-96.
30. Markman, A.B., & Stillwell, C.H. (2001). Role-governed categories. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 13, 329-358.
31. Markman, E.M. (1989). Categorization and naming in children. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Matan, A., & Carey, S. (2001). Developmental changes within the core of artifact concepts. Cognition, 78, 1-26.
33. McCloskey, M., & Glucksberg, S. (1978). Natural categories: Well-defined or fuzzy sets? Memory and Cognition, 6, 462-472.
34. Medin, D.L., Goldstone, R.L., & Gentner, D. (1993). Respects for similarity. Psychological Review, 100, 254-278.
35. Medin, D.L., & Ortony, A. (1989). Psychological essentialism. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
36. Nosofsky, R.M. (1988). Similarity, frequency, and category representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 54-65.
37. Putnam, H. (Ed.) (1975). The meaning of 'meaning'. In Mind, language, and reality: Philosophical papers, Vol. 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Rips, L.J. (1989). Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
39. Rips, L.J. (2001). Necessity and natural categories. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 827-852.
40. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C.B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605.
41. Sloman, S.A. (1994). When explanations compete: The role of explanatory coherence on judgments of likelihood. Cognition, 52, 1-21.
42. Sloman, S.A. (1998). Categorical inference is not a tree: The myth of inheritance hierarchies. Cognitive Psychology, 35, 1-33.
43. Sloman, S.A., & Ahn, W. (1999). Feature centrality: naming versus imagining. Memory and Cognition, 27, 526-537.
44. Sloman, S.A., Love, B.C., & Ahn, W. (1998). Feature centrality and conceptual coherence. Cognitive Science, 22, 189-228.
45. Sloman, S.A., Malt, B.C., & Fridman, A. (2001). Categorization versus similarity: the case of container names. In M. Ramscar, U. Hahn, E. Cambouropolos, & H. Pain (Eds.), Similarity and categorization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Sloman, S.A., & Rips, L.J. (1998). Similarity as an explanatory construct. Cognition, 65, 87-101.
47. Strevens, M. (2001a). The essentialist aspect of naive theories. Cognition, 74, 149-175.
48. Strevens, M. (2001b). Only causation matters: reply to Ahn et al. Cognition, 82, 71-76.
49. Strevens, M. (2001c). Further comments on Ahn et al. Website: http:/www-csli.stanford.edu/~strevens.