Inference and coherence in causal-based artifact categorization

Cognition

Volumn 130, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 50-65

  Puebla, Guillermo ^a   Chaigneau, Sergio E ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE TARAPACÁ   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSIDAD ADOLFO IBÁÑEZ   (Chile)

Author keywords

Artifacts; Causal inference; Causal based categorization; Coherence effect; Essentialism

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; CAUSAL INFERENCE; COGNITION; COHERENCE EFFECT; EXPERIMENT; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGY; ADULT; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RANDOMIZATION; THINKING; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; RANDOM ALLOCATION; THINKING; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84886819130     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ahn W. Why are different features central for natural kinds and artifacts?. Cognition 1998, 69:135-178.
2. Ahn W.K., Kalish C., Gelman S.A., Medin D.L., Luhmann C., Atran S., et al. Why essences are essential in the psychology of concepts. Cognition 2001, 82(1):59-69.
3. Ahn W., Kim N.S. The causal status effect in categorization: An overview. The psychology of learning and motivation 2001, Vol. 40:23-65. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
4. Ahn W., Kim N.S., Lassaline M.E., Dennis M.J. Causal status as a determinant of feature centrality. Cognitive Psychology 2000, 41:361-416.
5. Barton M.E., Komatsu L.K. Defining features of natural kinds and artifacts. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1989, 18(5):433-447.
6. Bloom P. More than words: A reply to Malt and Sloman. Cognition 2007, 105:649-655.
7. Chaigneau S.E., Barsalou L.W., Sloman S. Assessing the causal structure of function. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2004, 133:601-625.
8. Chaigneau S.E., Castillo R.D., Martínez L. Creators' intentions bias proper function independently from causal inferences. Cognition 2008, 109:123-132.
9. Chaigneau S.E., Puebla G. The proper function of artifacts: Intentions, conventions and causal inferences. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2013, 4(3):391-406.
10. Fernbach P.M., Darlow A., Sloman S.A. Asymmetries in predictive and diagnostic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2011, 140(2):168-185.
11. Gelman S.A. The essential child: Origins of essentialism in everyday thought 2003, Oxford University Press, New York.
12. Gelman S.A., Bloom P. Young children are sensitive to how an object was created when deciding what to name it. Cognition 2000, 76:91-103.
13. German T., Truxaw D., Defeyter M.A. The role of information about "convention", "design", and "goal" in representing artificial kinds. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 2007, 115:69-81.
14. Hampton J.A., Storms G., Simmons C.L., Heussen D. Feature integration in natural language concepts. Memory & Cognition 2009, 37(8):1150-1163.
15. Hernik M., Csibra G. Functional understanding facilitates learning about tools in human children. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2009, 19:34-38.
16. Kelemen D., Carey S. The essence of artifacts: Developing the design stance. Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation 2007, Oxford University Press, Oxford. S. Laurence, E. Margolis (Eds.).
17. Kemler Nelson D.G., Frankenfield A., Morris C., Blair E. Young children's use of functional information to categorize artifacts: Three factors that matter. Cognition 2000, 77:133-168.
18. Kruschke J.K. ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. Psychological Review 1992, 99:22-44.
19. Lombrozo T. Causal-explanatory pluralism: How intentions, functions, and mechanisms influence causal ascriptions. Cognitive Psychology 2010, 61:303-332.
20. Malt B.C., Johnson E.C. Do artifact concepts have cores?. Journal of Memory and Language 1992, 31:195-217.
21. Malt B.C., Sloman S.A. Artifact categorization: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation 2007, Oxford University Press. E. Margolis, S. Laurence (Eds.).
22. Matan A., Carey S. Developmental changes within the core of artifact concepts. Cognition 2001, 78:1-26.
23. Medin D.L., Schaffer M.M. Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 1978, 85:207-238.
24. Minda J.P., Smith J.D. Comparing prototype-based and exemplar-based accounts of category learning and attentional allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2002, 28:275-292.
25. Nosofsky R.M. Choice, similarity, and the context model of classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1984, 10:104-144.
26. Nosofsky R.M. Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1986, 115:39-57.
27. Oakes L.M., Madole K.L. Function revisited: How infants construe functional features in their representation of objects. Advances in child development and behavior 2008, Vol. 36:135-185. Elsevier, San Diego.
28. Pearl J. Causality: Models, reasoning, and inference 2000, Cambridge University Press.
29. Rehder B. Categorization as causal reasoning. Cognitive Science 2003, 27:709-748.
30. Rehder B. A causal-model theory of conceptual representation and categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2003, 29:1141-1159.
31. Rehder, B. (2010). Causal-based classification: A review. In B. Ross, (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 52, pp. 39-116).
32. Rehder, B. (2011). Reasoning with conjunctive causes. Paper presented at the 52nd annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Seattle, WA.
33. Rehder B., Burnett R. Feature inference and the causal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 2005, 50:264-314.
34. Rehder B., Hastie R. Causal knowledge and categories: The effects of causal beliefs on categorization, induction, and similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2001, 130:323-360.
35. Rehder B., Kim S. How causal knowledge affects classification: A generative theory of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2006, 32:659-683.
36. Rehder B., Kim S. Classification as diagnostic reasoning. Memory & Cognition 2009, 37:715-729.
37. Sloman S.A., Love B.C., Ahn W. Feature centrality and conceptual coherence. Cognitive Science 1998, 22:189-228.
38. Strevens M. The essentialist aspect of naïve theories. Cognition 2000, 74:149-175.