How action and context priming influence categorization: A developmental study

British Journal of Developmental Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 717-730

  Kalénine, Solène ^a   Bonthoux, Françoise ^a   Borghi, Anna M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PIERRE MENDÈS FRANCE   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; CHILD; CHILD DEVELOPMENT; CONCEPT FORMATION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HAND STRENGTH; HUMAN; IMAGINATION; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PINCH STRENGTH; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE;

ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; AWARENESS; CHILD; CHILD DEVELOPMENT; CONCEPT FORMATION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; IMAGINATION; MALE; MOTOR SKILLS; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PINCH STRENGTH; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 74049096579     PISSN: 0261510X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/026151008X369928     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Bar, M. (2004). Visual objects in context. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 617-629.
2. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Science, 22(4), 577-609.
3. Barsalou, L. W. (2005). Abstraction as dynamic interpretation in perceptual symbol systems. In L. Gershkoff-Stowe & D. Rakison (Eds.), Building object categories in developmental time (pp. 389-431). Malwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645.
5. Blaye, A., & Bonthoux, F. (2001). Thematic and taxonomic relations in preschoolers: The development of flexibility in categorization choices. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 395-412.
6. Bonthoux, F., & Kalénine, S. (2007). Superordinate categorization in preschoolers. Cognition, Brain and Behavior, 11(4), 713-731.
7. Borghi, A. M. (2004). Object concepts and action: Extracting affordances from objects parts. Acta Psychologica, 115(1), 69-96.
8. Borghi, A. M. (2005). Object concepts and action. In D. Pecher & R. Zwaan (Eds.), The grounding of cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, thinking (pp. 8-34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Borghi, A. M., Bonfiglioli, C., Lugli, L., Ricciardelli, P., Rubichi, S., & Nicoletti, R. (2007). Are visual stimuli sufficient to evoke motor information? Studies with hand primes. Neuroscience Letters, 411(1), 17-21.
10. Borghi, A. M., & Caramelli, N. (2001). Taxonomic relations and cognitive economy in conceptual organization. In J. D. Moore & K. Stenning (Eds.), Proceedings of 23rd Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 98-103). London: Erlbaum.
11. Borghi, A. M., & Caramelli, N. (2003). Situation bounded conceptual organization in children: From action to spatial relations. Cognitive Development, 18, 49-60.
12. Borghi, A. M., Caramelli, N., & Setti, A. (2005). Conceptual information on objects' locations. Brain and Language, 93(2), 140-151.
13. Boronat, C. B., Buxbaum, L. J., Coslett, H. B., Tang, K., Saffran, E. M., Kimberg, D. Y., et al. (2005). Distinctions between manipulation and function knowledge of objects: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Cognitive Brain Research, 23(2-3), 361-373.
14. Buccino, G., Binkofski, F., Fink, G. R., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., et al. (2001). Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: An fMRI study. European Journal of Neuroscience, 13, 400-404.
15. Buccino, G., Vogt, S., Ritzl, A., Fink, G. R., Zilles, K., Freund, H. J., et al. (2004). Neural circuits underlying imitation learning of hand actions: An event-related fMRI study. Neuron, 42(2), 323-334.
16. Bullier, J. (2001). Integrated model of visual processing. Brain Research. Brain Research Reviews, 36(2-3), 96-107.
17. Cannard, C., Blaye, A., Scheuner, N., & Bonthoux, F. (2005). Picture naming in 3- to 8-year-old French children: Methodological considerations for name agreement. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 37(3), 417-425.
18. Chao, L. L., & Martin, A. (2000). Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. Neuroimage, 12(4), 478-484.
19. Cook, S. W., Mitchell, Z., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2008). Gesturing makes learning last. Cognition, 106(2), 1047-1058.
20. Craighero, L., Bello, A., Fadiga, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (2002). Hand action preparation influences the responses to hand pictures. Neuropsychologia, 40, 492-502.
21. Creem-Regehr, S. H., & Lee, J. N. (2005). Neural representations of graspable objects: Are tools special? Cognitive Brain Research, 22(3), 457-469.
22. De Wilde, E., Vanoverberghe, V., Storms, G., & De Boeck, P. (2003). The instantiation principle re-evaluated. Memory, 11(6), 533-548.
23. Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2000). Micro-affordance: the potentiation of components of action by see objects. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 451-471.
24. Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensorimotor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 455-479.
25. Gelman, S. A. (2004). Psychological essentialism in children. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(9), 404-409.
26. Gentilucci, M. (2003). Object motor representation and language. Experimental Brain Research, 153(2), 260-265.
27. Gershkoff-Stowe, L. & Rakison, D. H. (Eds.), (2005). Building object categories in developmental time. Malwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Grafton, S. T., Fadiga, L., Arbib, M. A., & Rizzolatti, G. (1997). Premotor cortex activation during observation and naming of familiar tools. Neuroimage, 6(4), 231-236.
29. Greenfield, D. B., & Scott, M. S. (1986). Young children's preference for complementary pairs: Evidence against a shift to a taxonomic preference. Developmental Psychology, 22(1), 19-21.
30. Hashimoto, N., McGregor, K., & Graham, A. (2007). Conceptual organization at 6 and 8 years of age: Evidence from the semantic priming of object decisions. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(1), 161-176.
31. Heit, E., & Barsalou, L. W. (1996). The instantiation principle in natural categories. Memory, 4(4), 413-451.
32. Iacoboni, M., Molnar-Szakacs, I., Gallese, V., Buccino, G., Mazziotta, J. C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2005). Grasping the intentions of others with one's own mirror neuron system. PLoS Biology, 3(3), 529-535.
33. Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2004). Vitalistic causality in young children's naive biology. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(8), 356-362.
34. Kalénine, S., & Bonthoux, F. (2006). The formation of living and non-living superordinate concepts as a function of individual differences. Current Psychology Letters, 19(2), Retrieved from http://cpl.revues.org/document1066.html
35. Kalénine, S., & Bonthoux, F. (2008). Object manipulability affects children and adults' conceptual processing. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 667-672.
36. Keil, F. C. (2006). Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 227-254.
37. Kelemen, D., & Carey, S. (2007). The essence of artifacts: Developping the design stance. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their reprensentation (pp. 212-230). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. 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(1), 30-46.
39. Krauss, R. M. (1998). Why do we gesture when we speak? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(2), 54-60.
40. Lepage, J.-F., & Théoret, H. (2007). The mirror neuron system: Grasping others' actions from birth? Developmental Science, 10(5), 513-523.
41. Lin, E. L., & Murphy, G. L. (2001). Thematic relations in adults' concepts. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 130(1), 3-28.
42. Lin, E. L., Murphy, G. L., & Shoben, E. J. (1997). The effect of prior processing episodes on basic level superiority. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A(1), 25-48.
43. Lucariello, J., Kyratzis, A., & Nelson, K. (1992). Taxonomic knowledge: What kind and when? Child Development, 63, 978-998.
44. Mandler, J. M. (2000). Perceptual and conceptual processes in infancy. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1, 3-36.
45. Marques, J. F. (2006). Specialization and semantic organization: Evidence for multiple semantics linked to sensory modalities. Memory and Cognition, 34(1), 60-67.
46. Marques, J. F. (2007). The general/specific breakdown of semantic memory and the nature of superordinate knowledge: Insights from superordinate and basic level feature norms. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 24(8), 879-903.
47. Mervis, C. B., & Crisafi, M. A. (1982). Order of acquisition of subordinate, basic, and superordinate-level categories. Child Development, 53, 258-266.
48. Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 89-115.
49. Mounoud, P., Duscherer, K., Moy, G., & Perraudin, S. (2007). The influence of action perception on object recognition: A developmental study. Developmental Science, 10(6), 836-852.
50. Murphy, G. L. (2001). Causes of taxonomic sorting by adults: A test of the thematic-to-taxonomic shift. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8(4), 834-839.
51. Murphy, G. L., & Wisniewski, E. J. (1989). Categorizing objects in isolation and in scenes: What a superordinate is good for. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 572-586.
52. Myung, J. -Y., Blumstein, S. E., & Sedivy, J. C. (2006). Playing on the typewriter, typing on the panio: Manipulation knowledge of objects. Cognition, 1-21.
53. Nelson, K. (1983). The derivation of concepts and categories from event representations. In E. K. Scholnick (Ed.), New trends in conceptual representation: Challenges to Piaget's theory? (pp. 129-149). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
54. Nelson, K. (1985). Making sense. The acquisition of shared meaning. New York: Academic Press.
55. Nguyen, S. P. (2007). Cross-classification and category representation in children's concepts. Developmental Psychology, 43(3), 719-731.
56. Nguyen, S. P., & Murphy, G. L. (2003). An apple is more than just a fruit: Cross-classification in children's concepts. Child Development, 74(6), 1783-1806.
57. Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying different-modality properties for concepts produces switching costs. Psychological Science, 14(2), 119-124.
58. Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Sensorimotor simulations underlie conceptual representations: Modality-specific effects of prior activation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11(1), 164-167.
59. Peyrin, C., Baciu, M., Segebarth, C., & Marendaz, C. (2004). Cerebral regions and hemispheric specialization for processing spatial frequencies during natural scene recognition. An eventrelated fMRI study. Neuroimage, 23(2), 697-706.
60. Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169-192.
61. Smiley, S. S., & Brown, A. L. (1979). Conceptual preference for thematic or taxonomic relations: A nonmonotonic age trend from preschool to old age. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 28, 249-257.
62. Smith, L. B. (2005). Action alters shape categories. Cognitive Science, 29, 665-679.
63. Spelke, E. S., & Kinzler, K. D. (2007). Core knowledge. Developmental Science, 10(1), 89-96.
64. Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12(2), 153-156.
65. Thorpe, S. J., Fize, D., & Marlot, C. (1996). Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nature, 381, 520-522.
66. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2004). Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychologica, 116(2), 185-203.
67. Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13(2), 168-171.