Insights into knowledge representation: The influence of amodal and perceptual variables on event knowledge retrieval from memory

Cognitive Science

Volumn 33, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 1252-1266

  Raisig, Susanne ^a   Welke, Tinka ^a   Hagendorf, Herbert ^a   van der Meer, Elke ^a  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Frequency effects; Knowledge representation; Retrieval; Scripts

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949774885     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01044.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Anderson, J. R. (1974). Retrieval of propositional information from long-term memory. Cognitive Psychology, 6(4), 451-474.
2. Barsalou, L. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
3. Barsalou, L. W., Breazeal, C., & Smith, L. B. (2007). Cognition as coordinated non-cognition. Cognitive Processing, 8(2), 79-91.
4. Barsalou, L. W., Santos, A., Simmons, W. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2008). Language and simulation in conceptual processing. In M. de Vega, A. M. Glenberg, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Symbols, embodiment, and meaning (pp. 245-284). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
5. Barsalou, L. W., & Sewell, D. R. (1985). Contrasting the representation of scripts and categories. Journal of Memory and Language, 24(6), 646-665.
6. Beech, J. R., & Allport, D. A. (1978). Visualization of compound scenes. Perception, 7(2), 129-138.
7. Bird, H., Franklin, S., & Howard, D. (2001). Age of acquisition and imageability ratings for a large set of words, including verbs and function words. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 33(1), 73-79.
8. Conway, M. A. (2002). Sensory-perceptual episodic memory and its context: Autobiographical memory. In A. D. Baddeley (Ed.), Episodic memory. New directions in research (pp. 53-70). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
9. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
10. Farah, M. J., & Kosslyn, S. M. (1981). Structure and strategy in image generation. Cognitive Science, 5(4), 371-383.
11. Gabora, L. (1999). Grounded in perception yet transformed into amodal symbols. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 617.
12. Galambos, J. (1983). Normative studies of six characteristics of our knowledge of common activities. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 15, 327-340.
13. Galambos, J., & Rips, L. J. (1982). Memory for routines. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(3), 260-281.
14. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 558-565.
15. Grafman, J. (1995). Similarities and distinctions among current models of prefrontal cortical functions. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 769, 337-368.
16. Hegarty, M. (2004). Mechanical reasoning by mental simulation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(6), 280-285.
17. Humphreys, G. W., & Forde, E. M. E. (1998). Disordered action schema and action disorganization syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 15, 771-811.
18. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language inference and consciousness (1st ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
19. Kosslyn, S. M., Reiser, B. J., Farah, M. J., & Fliegel, S. L. (1983). Generating visual images: Units and relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112(2), 278-303.
20. Krueger, F., Moll, J., Zahn, R., Heinecke, A., & Grafman, J. (2007). Event frequency modulates the processing of daily life activities in human medial prefrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 17(10), 2346-2353.
21. Louwerse, M. M. (2007). Symbolic or embodied representations: A case for symbol interdependency. In T. K. Landauer, D. S. McNamara, S. Dennis, & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Handbook of latent semantic analysis (pp. 107-120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2008). A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content: Links and interactions between language and motor systems in the brain. Journal of Physiology-Paris, 102(1-3), 59-70.
23. Markman, A. B., & Dietrich, E. (2000). Extending the classical view of representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(12), 470-475.
24. Nuthmann, A., & van der Meer, E. (2005). Time's arrow and pupillary response. Psychophysiology, 42(3), 306-317.
25. Raisig, S., Welke, T., Hagendorf, H., & van der Meer, E. (2007). Investigating dimensional organization in scripts using the pupillary response. Psychophysiology, 44(6), 864-873.
26. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8(3), 382-439.
27. Rosen, V. M., Caplan, L., Sheesley, L., Rodriguez, R., & Grafman, J. (2003). An examination of daily activities and their scripts across the adult lifespan. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 32-48.
28. Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Understanding and summarizing brief stories. In D. LaBerge & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading. Perception and comprehension (pp. 265-303). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding: Inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Sirigu, A., Zalla, T., Pillon, B., Grafman, J., Agid, Y., & Dubois, B. (1995). Selective impairments in managerial knowledge following pre-frontal cortex damage. Cortex, 31(2), 301-316.
31. Solomon, K., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Perceptual simulation in property verification. Memory & Cognition, 32(2), 244-259.
32. Zwaan, R. A., Madden, C. J., Yaxley, R. H., & Aveyard, M. E. (2004). Moving words: Dynamic representations in language comprehension. Cognitive Science, 28(4), 611-619.