Assessing the causal structure of function

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 133, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 601-625

  Chaigneau, Sergio E ^a,b   Sloman, Steven A ^c   Barsalou, Lawrence W ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE TARAPACÁ   (Chile)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; REVIEW;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE;

EID: 10844276282     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.601     Document Type: Review

References (81)

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., & Bailenson, J. (1996). Causal attribution as a search for underlying mechanisms: An explanation of the conjunction fallacy and the discounting principle. Cognitive Psychology, 31, 82-123.
3. Ahn, W., & Kalish, C. W. (2000). The role of mechanism beliefs in causal reasoning. In F. Keil & R. Wilson (Eds.), Explanation and cognition (pp. 199-225). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Ahn, W., Kalish, C. W., Medin, D. L., & Gelman, S. A. (1995). The role of covariation versus mechanism information in causal attribution. Cognition, 54, 299-352.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (1987). The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization (pp. 101-140). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
6. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
7. Barsalou, L. W. (2003a). Abstraction in perceptual symbol systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences, 358, 1177-1187.
8. Barsalou, L. W. (2003b). Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 513-562.
9. 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. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
10. Barton, M. E., & Komatsu, L. K. (1989). Defining features of natural kinds and artifacts. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 433-447.
11. Bloom, P. (1996). Intention, history, and artifact concepts. Cognition, 60, 1-29.
12. Bloom, P. (1998). Theories of artifact categorization. Cognition, 66, 87-93.
13. Chaigneau, S. E. (2002). Studies in the conceptual structure of object function. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Emory University, Atlanta, GA.
14. Chaigneau, S. E., & Barsalou, L. W. (in press). The role of function in categorization. Theoria et Historia Scientiarum.
15. Chaigneau, S. E., Barsalou, L. W., & Zamani, M. (2004). Function as a multimodal relational construct. Manuscript in preparation.
16. Chandrasekaran, B., & Josephson, J. R. (2000). Function in device representation. Engineering With Computers, 16, 162-177.
17. Chao L. L., & Martin A. (2000). Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. Neuroimage, 12, 478-484.
18. Cheng, P. W. (1997), From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104, 367-405.
19. Cheng, P. W., & Novick, L. R. (1992). Covariation in natural causal induction. Psychological Review, 99, 365-382.
20. Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
21. Cree, G. S., & McRae, K. (2003). Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk, cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 163-201.
22. Diesendruck, G., Markson, L., & Bloom, P. (2003). Children's reliance on creator's intent in extending names for artifacts. Psychological Science, 14, 164-168.
23. Farrar, M. J., Raney, G. E., & Boyer, M. E. (1992). Knowledge, concepts, and inferences in childhood. Child Development, 63, 673-691.
24. Fincher-Kiefer, R. (2001). Perceptual components of situation models. Memory and Cognition, 29, 336-343.
25. Forbus, K. (1993). Qualitative process theory: Twelve years after. Artificial Intelligence, 59, 115-123.
26. Gelman, S. A. (1988). The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 65-95.
27. 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.
28. Gentner, D. (1978). What looks like a jiggy but acts like a zimbo? A study of early word meaning using artificial objects. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 15, 1-6.
29. Gentner, D., & Rattermann, M. J. (1991). Language and the career of similarity. In S. Gelman & J. Byrnes (Eds.), Perspectives on language and thought: Interrelations in development (pp. 225-277). New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Gibson, J. J. (1950). The perception of the visual world. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
31. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
32. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin A Review, 9, 558-569.
33. Glenberg, A. M., & Robertson D. A. (2000). Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied theories of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 379-401.
34. Glymour, C. (2001). The mind's arrows: Bayes nets and graphical causal models in psychology. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
35. Gutheil, G., Bloom, P., Valderrama, N., & Freedman, R. (2004). The role of historical intuitions in children's and adult's naming of artifacts. Cognition, 91, 23-42.
36. Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41, 301-307.
37. Heit, E., & Rubinstein, J. (1994). Similarity and property effects in inductive reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 411-422.
38. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-454.
39. Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2000). Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and grammatical constructions in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 508-529.
40. Keil, F. C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press
41. Kellenbach, M. L., Brett, M., & Patterson, K. (2003). Actions speak louder than functions: The importance of manipulability and action in tool representation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 30-46.
42. Kemler-Nelson, D. G. (1995). Principle-based inferences in young children's categorization: Revisiting the impact of function on the naming of artifacts. Cognitive Development, 10, 347-380.
43. Kemler-Nelson, D. G., Frankenfield, A., Morris, C., & Blair, E. (2000). Young children's use of functional information to categorize artifacts: Three factors that matter. Cognition, 77, 133-168.
44. Kemler-Nelson, D. G., Russell, R., Duke, N., & Jones, K. (2000). Two-year-olds name artifacts by their functions. Child Development, 71, 1271-1288.
45. Kim, N., & Ahn, W. (2002). Clinical psychologists' theory-based representations of mental disorders predict their diagnostic reasoning and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 451-476.
46. Krauss, R. M., & Glucksberg, S. (1977). Social and nonsocial speech. Scientific American, 236, 100-105.
47. Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (1998). Object shape, object function, and object name. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 1-27.
48. Madole, K. L., & Oakes, L. M. (in press). Infants' attention to and use of functional properties in categorization. In L. Curlson & E. van der Zee (Eds.). Functional features in language and space: Insights from perception, categorization, and development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
49. Malt, B. C., & Johnson, E. C. (1992). Do artifact concepts have cores? Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 195-217.
50. Malt, B. C., & Sloman, S. A. (in press). Artifact concepts are artifactual. In E., Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Essays on artifacts and their representation. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
51. Markman, A. B., & Gentner. D. (1997). The effects of alienability on memory. Psychological Science. 8, 363-367.
52. Martin, A. (2001). Functional neuroimaging of semantic memory, In R. Cabeza & A. Kingstone (Eds.), Handbook of functional neuroimaging of cognition (pp. 153-186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
53. Matan, A., & Carey, S. (2001). Developmental changes within the core of artifact concepts. Cognition, 78, 1-26.
54. Medin, D. L., Lynch, E. B., Coley, J. D., & Atran, S. (1997). Categorization and reasoning among tree experts: Do all roads lead to Rome? Cognitive Psychology, 32, 49-96.
55. Pearl, J. (2000). Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
56. Prasada, S. (1999). Names for things and stuff: An Aristotelian perspective. In R. Jackendoff, P. Bloom, & K. Wynn (Eds.), Language, logic, and concepts: Essays in honor of John Macnamara (pp. 119-146). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
57. Putnam, H. (1975). The meaning of "meaning." In H. Putnam (Ed.), Mind, language and reality. Philosophical papers (Vol. 2, pp. 215-271). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
58. st annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 595-600). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
59. Rehder, B., & Burnett, R. C. (in press). Inferring unobserved category features with causal knowledge. Cognitive Psychology.
60. Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Barsalou, L. W., & McRae, K. (2003). Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cognitive Science, 27, 767-780.
61. Rips, L. J. (1989). Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 21-59). New York: Cambridge University Press.
62. Ross, B. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1999). Food for thought: Cross-classification and category organization in a complex real-world domain. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 495-553.
63. Rozenblit, L., & Keil, F. (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth. Cognitive Science, 26, 521-562.
64. Shanks, D. R. (1991). On similarities between causal judgments in experienced and described situations. Psychological Science, 2, 341-350.
65. Sloman, S. A., & Lagnado, D. (2004). Causal invariance in reasoning and learning. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 44, pp. 287-325). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
66. Sloman, S. A., Love, B., & Ahn, W. (1998). Feature centrality and conceptual coherence. Cognitive Science, 22, 189-228.
67. Sloman, S. A., & Malt, B. C. (2003). Artifacts are not ascribed essences, nor are they treated as belonging to kinds, Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 563-582.
68. Sloman, S. A., & Rips, L. J. (1998). Similarity as an explanatory construct. Cognition, 65, 87-101.
69. Smith, L. B. (1999). Children's noun learning: How general learning processes make specialized learning mechanisms. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 277-303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
70. Smith, L. B., Jones, S. S., & Landau, B. (1996). Naming in young children: A dumb attentional mechanism? Cognition, 60, 143-171.
71. Spellman, B. A. (1997). Crediting causality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 323-348.
72. Spivey, M., Tyler, M., Richardson, D., & Young, E. (2000). Eye movements during comprehension of spoken scene descriptions. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 487-492). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
73. Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12, 153-156.
74. Tomikawa, S. A., & Dodd, D. H. (1980). Early word meanings: Perceptually or functionally based. Child Development, 51, 1103-1109.
75. Tversky, B. (1989). Parts, partonomies, and taxonomies. Developmental Psychology, 25, 983-995.
76. Waldmann, M. R. (1996). Knowledge-based causal induction. In D. R. Shanks, K. J. Holyoak, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Causal learning (pp. 47-88). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
77. Waldmann, M. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1992). Predictive and diagnostic learning within causal models: Asymmetries in cue competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 222-236.
78. Warrington, E. K., & Shallice, T. (1984). Category specific semantic impairments. Brain, 107, 829-854.
79. Wimsatt, W. C. (1972). Teleological and logical structure of function statements. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 3, 1-80.
80. Wright, L. (1973). Functions. Philosophical Review, 82, 139-168.
81. Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13, 168-171.