Learning to manipulate and categorize in human and artificial agents

Cognitive Science

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 39-64

  Morlino, Giuseppe ^a,b   Gianelli, Claudia ^c   Borghi, Anna M ^a,c   Nolfi, Stefano ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES   (Italy)

^b SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Categorization; Category and action learning; Embodied cognition; Neural networks; Shape bias

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; MALE; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84921499034     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: 15516709     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12130     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Ansuini, C., Giosa, L., Turella, L., Altoè, G., & Castiello, U. (2008). An object for an action, the same object for other actions: Effects on hand shaping. Experimental Brain Research, 185(1), 111-119.
2. Ansuini, C., Tognin, V., Turella, L., & Castiello, U. (2007). Distractor objects affect fingers' angular distances but not fingers' shaping during grasping. Experimental Brain Research, 178(2), 194-205.
3. Ashby, E. G., & Maddox, W. D. (2005). Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149-178.
4. Barsalou, L. W. (2002). Being there conceptually: Simulating categories in preparation for situated action. In N. L. Stein, P. J. Bauer, & M. Rabinowitz (Eds.), Representation, memory, and development: Essays in honor of Jean Mandler (pp. 1-19). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617-645.
6. Bateson, G. (1987). Men are grass: Metaphor and the world of mental process. In W. Thompson (Ed.), Gaia: A way of knowing (pp. 37-47). Hudson, NY: Lindisfarne Press.
7. Borghi, A. M. (2005). Object concept and action. In D. Pecher & R. A. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 8-34). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Borghi, A. M., & Cimatti, F. (2010). Embodied cognition and beyond: Acting and sensing the body. Neuropsychologia, 48(3), 763-773.
9. Borghi, A. M., Flumini, A., Natraj, N., & Wheaton, L. A. (2012). One hand, two objects: Emergence of affordance in contexts. Brain and Cognition, 80(1), 64-73.
10. Brouwer, A. M., Georgiou, G., Glover, S., & Castiello, U. (2006). Adjusting reach to lift movements to sudden visible changes in target's weight. Experimental Brain Research, 173(4), 629-636.
11. Chatterjee, A. (2010). Disembodying cognition. Language and Cognition, 2(1), 79-116.
12. Chemero, A. (2009). Radical embodied cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Costantini, M., Ambrosini, E., Scorolli, C., & Borghi, A. M. (2011). When objects are close to me: Affordances in the peripersonal space. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(2), 302-308.
14. Crajé, C., Lukos, J. R., Ansuini, C., Gordon, A. M., & Santello, M. (2011). The effects of task and content on digit placement on a bottle. Experimental Brain Research, 212(1), 119-124.
15. van Elk, M., Slors, M., & Bekkering, H. (2010). Embodied language comprehension requires an enactivist paradigm of cognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 1(234).
16. Ellis, R., Swabey, D., Bridgeman, J., May, B., Tucker, M., & Hyne, A. (2013). Bodies and other visual objects: The dialectics of reaching toward objects. Psychological Research, 77(1), 31-39.
17. Ellis, R., & Tucker, M. (2000). Micro-affordance: The potentiation of components of action by seen objects. British Journal of Psychology, 91(4), 451-471.
18. Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensorimotor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21(3), 455-479.
19. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
20. Gigliotta, O., & Nolfi, S. (2008). On the coupling between agent internal and agent/environmental dynamics: Development of spatial representations in evolving autonomous robots. Adaptive Behavior, 16(2-3), 148-165.
21. Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20(1), 1-55.
22. Glenberg, A. M., & Gallese, V. (2012). Action-based language: A theory of language acquisition, comprehension, and production. Cortex, 48(7), 905-922.
23. Goldman, A. I., & De Vignemont, F. (2009). Is social cognition embodied? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 154-159.
24. Iachini, T., Borghi, A. M., & Senese, P. (2008). Categorization and sensorimotor interaction with objects. Brain and Cognition, 67(1), 31-43.
25. Jenmalm, P., Schmitz, C., Forssberg, H., & Ehrsson, H. H. (2006). Lighter or heavier than predicted: Neural correlates of corrective mechanisms during erroneously programmed lifts. The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(35), 9015-9021.
26. Jones, S., & Smith, L. B. (1993). The place of perception in children's concepts. Cognitive Development, 8(2), 113-139.
27. Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (1988). The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development, 3(3), 299-321.
28. Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. (1998). Object perception and object naming in early development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(1), 19-24.
29. Lederman, S. J., & Wing, A. M. (2003). Perceptual judgment, grasp selection and object symmetry. Experimental Brain Research, 152(2), 156-165.
30. Mandler, J. M. (2004). Thought before language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 8(11), 508-513.
31. Mandler, J. M., Bauer, P. J., & McDonough, L. (1991). Separating the sheep from the goats: Differentiating global categories. Cognitive Psychology, 23(2), 263-298.
32. Markman, A. B., & Ross, B. H. (2003). Category use and category learning. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 592-613.
33. Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1992). The Tree of Knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding. Boston, MA: Shamabala.
34. Mizelle, J. C., & Wheaton, L. A. (2010). Why is that hammer in my coffee? A multimodal imaging investigation of contextually based tool understanding. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 4, 233.
35. Natraj, N., Poole, V., Mizelle, J. C., Flumini, A., Borghi, A. M., & Wheaton, L. (2013). Context and hand posture modulate the neural dynamics of tool-object perception. Neuropsychologia, 51(3), 506-519.
36. Nöe, A. (2004). Action in perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
37. Nolfi, S., & Floreano, D. (2000). Evolutionary robotics: The biology, intelligence, and technology of self-organizing machines. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
38. Nolfi, S., & Marocco, D. (2002). Active perception: A sensorimotor account of object categorization. In B. Hallam, D. Floreano, J. Hallam, G. Hayes, & J.-A. Meyer (Eds.), From animals to animats 7, Proceedings of the VII International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior (pp. 266-271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Pezzulo, G., Barsalou, L. W., Cangelosi, A., Fischer, M. A., McRae, K., & Spivey, M. (2011). The mechanics of embodiment: A dialogue on embodiment and computational modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(5), 1-21.
40. Pfeifer, R., & Scheier, C. (1999). Understanding intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Poirier, P., Hardy-Vallee, B., & De Pasquale, J.-F. (2008). Embodied categorization. In H. Cohen & C. Lefebvre (Eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
42. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., David, M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8 (3), 382-439.
43. Samuelson, L. K., & Smith, L. B. (1999). Early noun vocabularies: Do ontology, category structure, and syntax correspond? Cognition, 73(1), 1-33.
44. Sartori, L., Straulino, E., & Castiello, U. (2011). How objects are grasped: The interplay between affordances and end-goals. PLoS ONE, 6(9), e25203.
45. Scorolli, C., Borghi, A. M., & Glenberg, A. M. (2009). Language-induced motor activity in bimanual object lifting. Experimental Brain Research, 193, 43-53.
46. Smith, L. B. (2005). Action alters shape categories. Cognitive Science, 29(4), 665-679.
47. Tipper, S. P., Paul, M., & Hayes, A. (2006). Vision-for-action: The effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(3), 493-498.
48. Tuci, E., Massera, G., & Nolfi, S. (2010). Active categorical perception of object shapes in a simulated anthropomorphic robotic arm. Transaction on Evolutionary Computation Journal, 14 (6), 885-899.
49. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2001). The potentiation of grasp types during visual object categorization. Visual Cognition, 8(6), 769-800.
50. Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
51. Vassie, K., & Morlino, G. (2012). Natural and artificial systems: Compare, model or engineer? In T. Ziemke, C. Balkenius, & J. Hallam (Eds.), From animals to animats 12, LNAI 7426 (pp. 1-11). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
52. Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625-636.
53. Yoon, E. Y., Humphreys, W. W., & Riddoch, M. J. (2010). The paired-object affordance effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(4), 812-824.