Concepts are not represented by conscious imagery

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 914-919

  Pecher, Diane ^a   van Dantzig, Saskia ^a   Schifferstien, Hendrik N J ^b  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONSCIOUSNESS; HUMAN; IMAGINATION; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE;

COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; CONSCIOUSNESS; HUMANS; IMAGINATION; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 74849092076     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.5.914     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
2. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617-645.
3. Barsalou, L. W. (2009). Simulation, situated conceptualization, and prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 364, 1281-1289. doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0319
4. Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 84-91.
5. Betts, G. H. (1909). The distribution and functions of mental imagery (Contributions to Education Series, No. 26). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
6. Blajenkova, O., Kozhevnikov, M., & Motes, M. A. (2006). Objectspatial imagery: A new self-report imagery questionnaire. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 239-263.
7. Borst, G., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2008). Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Memory & Cognition, 36, 849-862. doi:10.3758/MC.36.4.849
8. Burton, L. J., & Fogarty, G. J. (2003). The factor structure of visual imagery and spatial abilities. Intelligence, 31, 289-318.
9. Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 20, 1-55.
10. Goldberg, R. F., Perfetti, C. A., & Schneider, W. (2006). Perceptual knowledge retrieval activates sensory brain regions. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 4917-4921.
11. Kosslyn, S. M., Brunn, J., Cave, K. R., & Wallach, R. W. (1984). Individual differences in mental imagery ability: A computational analysis. Cognition, 18, 195-243.
12. Kozhevnikov, M., Kosslyn, S., & Shephard, J. (2005). Spatial versus object visualizers: A new characterization of visual cognitive style. Memory & Cognition, 33, 710-726.
13. Laws, K. R. (2002). Category-specific naming and modality-specific imagery. Brain & Cognition, 48, 418-420.
14. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2008). A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology, 102, 59-70.
15. Marks, D. F. (1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 17-24.
16. Marques, J. F. (2006). Specialization and semantic organization: Evidence for multiple semantics linked to sensory modalities. Memory & Cognition, 34, 60-67.
17. Martin, A., Haxby, J. V., Lalonde, F. M., Wiggs, C. L., & Ungerleider, L. G. (1995). Discrete cortical regions associated with knowledge of color and knowledge of action. Science, 270, 102-105.
18. Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying different-modality properties for concepts produces switching costs. Psychological Science, 14, 119-124.
19. Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Sensorimotor simulations underlie conceptual representations: Modality-specific effects of prior activation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 164-167.
20. Pulvermüller, F. (1999). Words in the brain's language. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 253-336.
21. Rouw, R., Kosslyn, S. M., & Hamel, R. (1997). Detecting high-level and low-level properties in visual images and visual percepts. Cognition, 63, 209-226.
22. Sheehan, P. W. (1967). A shortened form of Betts' Questionnaire upon mental imagery. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 386-389.
23. Solomon, K. O., & Barsalou, L. W. (2001). Representing properties locally. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 129-169.
24. Solomon, K. O., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Perceptual simulation in property verification. Memory & Cognition, 32, 244-259.
25. Spence, C., Nicholls, M. E. R., & Driver, J. (2001). The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 330-336.
26. Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12, 153-156.
27. van Dantzig, S., & Pecher, D. (2009). Norms for the modalityexclusivity of 392 concept-property items. Unpublished manuscript.
28. van Dantzig, S., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Perceptual processing affects conceptual processing. Cognitive Science, 32, 579-590.
29. Vermeulen, N., Corneille, O., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2008). Sensory load incurs conceptual processing costs. Cognition, 109, 287-294.
30. Vermeulen, N., Niedenthal, P. M., & Luminet, O. (2007). Switching between sensory and affective systems incurs processing costs. Cognitive Science, 31, 183-192.