Putting concepts into context

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 1015-1027

  Yee, Eiling ^a,b   Thompson Schill, Sharon L ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b BASQUE CENTER ON COGNITION   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Embodied cognition; Semantic memory

Indexed keywords

COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMAN; MEMORY; SEMANTICS;

COGNITION; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMANS; MEMORY; SEMANTICS;

EID: 84973663853     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-015-0948-7     Document Type: Review

References (113)

1. Allport, D. A. (1985). Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. In S. K. Newman & R. Epstein (Eds.), Current perspectives in dysphasia (pp. 207–244). Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone.
2. Altmann, G. T. M. (1997). The Ascent of Babel: An exploration of language, mind, and understanding. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
3. Anderson, S. E., & Spivey, M. J. (2009). The enactment of language: Decades of interactions between linguistic and motor processes. Language and Cognition, 1, 87–111.
4. Barclay, J. R., Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., McCarrell, N. S., & Nitsch, K. E. (1974). Comprehension and semantic flexibility. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 471–481.
5. Barsalou, L. W. (1987). The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In U. Neisser (Ed.), Concepts and conceptual development (pp. 101–140). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
6. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–609. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99002149. disc. 609–660.
7. Beilock, S. L., Lyons, I. M., Mattarella-Micke, A., Nusbaum, H. C., & Small, S. L. (2008). Sports experience changes the neural processing of action language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 13269–13273.
8. Bermeitinger, C., Wentura, D., & Frings, C. (2011). How to switch on and switch off semantic priming effects for natural and artifactual categories: Activation processes in category memory depend on focusing specific feature dimensions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 579–585. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0067-z
9. Binder, J. R., & Desai, R. H. (2011). The neurobiology of semantic memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 527–536. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.10.001
10. Bub, D. N., & Masson, M. E. J. (2010). On the nature of hand–action representations evoked during written sentence comprehension. Cognition, 116, 394–408.
11. Bub, D. N., & Masson, M. E. J. (2012). On the dynamics of action representations evoked by names of manipulable objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 502–517. doi:10.1037/a0026748
12. Casasanto, D., & Lupyan, G. (2015). All concepts are ad hoc concepts. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), The conceptual mind: New directions in the study of concepts (pp. 543–566). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Chatterjee, A. (2010). Disembodying cognition. Language and Cognition, 2, 79–116. doi:10.1515/LANGCOG.2010.004
14. Chrysikou, E. G., Hamilton, R. H., Coslett, H. B., Datta, A., Bikson, M., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2013). Non-invasive transcranial direct current stimulation over the left prefrontal cortex facilitates cognitive flexibility in tool use. Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 81–89.
15. Cohen, J. D., Aston-Jones, G., & Gilzenrat, M. S. (2004). A systems-level perspective on attention and cognitive control: Guided activation, adaptive gating, conflict monitoring, and exploitation vs. exploration. In M. I. Posner (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience of attention (pp. 71–90). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
16. Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2012). When does perception facilitate or interfere with conceptual processing? The effect of attentional modulation. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 474. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00474
17. Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2014a). I see/hear what you mean: Semantic activation in visual word recognition depends on perceptual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 527–533.
18. Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2014b). Principles of representation: Why you can’t represent the same concept twice. Topics in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 390–406. doi:10.1111/tops.12097
19. Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 84–107.
20. Damasio, A. R. (1989). The brain binds entities and events by multiregional activation from convergence zones. Neural Computation, 1, 123–132.
21. Dove, G. (2015). Three symbol ungrounding problems: Abstract concepts and the future of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. Advance online publication. doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0825-4
22. Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14, 179–211.
23. Elman, J. L. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. Cognition, 48, 71–99.
24. Elman, J. L. (2004). An alternative view of the mental lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 301–306. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.003
25. Elman, J. L. (2009). On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive Science, 33, 547–582. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01023.x
26. Elman, J. L., Bates, E. A., Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. (1996). Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
27. Flores d’Arcais, G., Schreuder, R., & Glazenborg, G. (1985). Semantic activation during recognition or referential words. Psychological Research, 47, 39–49.
28. Frith, C. (2000). The role of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in the selection of action as revealed by functional imaging. In S. Monsell & J. S. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 549–565). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Gainotti, G. (2000). What the locus of brain lesion tells us about the nature of the cognitive defect underlying category-specific disorders: A review. Cortex, 36, 539–559. doi:10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70537-9
30. Garcea, F. E., & Mahon, B. Z. (2012). What is in a tool concept? Dissociating manipulation knowledge from function knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 40, 1303–1313.
31. Gotts, S. J., Milleville, S. C., & Martin, A. (2015). Object identification leads to a conceptual broadening of object representations in lateral prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 76, 62–78. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.10.041
32. Hauk, O., & Tschentscher, N. (2013). The body of evidence: What can neuroscience tell us about embodied semantics? Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 50. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00050
33. Herrera, E., Rodríguez-Ferreiro, J., & Cuetos, F. (2012). The effect of motion content in action naming by Parkinson’s disease patients. Cortex, 48, 900–904.
34. Hoenig, K., Muller, C., Herrnberger, B., Spitzer, M., Ehret, G., & Kiefer, M. (2011). Neuroplasticity of semantic maps for musical instruments in professional musicians. NeuroImage, 56, 1714–1725.
35. Hoenig, K., Sim, E.-J., Bochev, V., Herrnberger, B., & Kiefer, M. (2008). Conceptual flexibility in the human brain: Dynamic recruitment of semantic maps from visual, motion and motor-related areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 1799–1814. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20123
36. Hsu, N. S., Kraemer, D. J. M., Oliver, R. T., Schlichting, M. L., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2011). Color, context, and cognitive style: Variations in color knowledge retrieval as a function of task and subject variables. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29, 2544–2557.
37. Humphreys, G. W., & Forde, E. M. (2001). Hierarchies, similarity, and interactivity in object recognition: “Category-specific” neuropsychological deficits. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 453–476. disc. 476–509.
38. Kalénine, S., Mirman, D., Middleton, E. L., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2012). Temporal dynamics of activation of thematic and functional knowledge during conceptual processing of manipulable artifacts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1274–1295. doi:10.1037/a0027626
39. Kalénine, S., Shapiro, A. D., Flumini, A., Borghi, A. M., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2014). Visual context modulates potentiation of grasp types during semantic object categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 645–651. doi:10.3758/s13423-013-0536-7
40. Kan, I. P., Kable, J. W., Van Scoyoc, A., Chatterjee, A., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2006). Fractionating the left frontal response to tools: Dissociable effects of motor experience and lexical competition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 267–277.
41. Kan, I. P., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2004a). Effect of name agreement on prefrontal activity during overt and covert picture naming. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 4, 43–57. doi:10.3758/CABN.4.1.43
42. Kan, I. P., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2004b). Selection from perceptual and conceptual representations. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 4, 466–482. doi:10.3758/CABN.4.4.466
43. Kiefer, M., & Martens, U. (2010). Attentional sensitization of unconscious cognition: Task sets modulate subsequent masked semantic priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 464–489.
44. Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex, 48, 805–825. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.006
45. Kiefer, M., Sim, E.-J., Liebich, S., Hauk, O., & Tanaka, J. (2007). Experience-dependent plasticity of conceptual representations in human sensory–motor areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 525–542.
46. Kirby, J., Moore, P., & Schofield, N. (1988). Verbal and visual learning styles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 169–184.
47. Kraemer, D. J., Rosenberg, L. M., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2009). The neural correlates of visual and verbal cognitive styles. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 3792–3798. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4635-08.2009
48. Lebois, L. A. M., Wilson-Mendenhall, C. D., & Barsalou, L. W. (2014). Are automatic conceptual cores the gold standard of semantic processing? The context-dependence of spatial meaning in grounded congruency effects. Cognitive Science. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/cogs.12174
49. Lee, C.-L., Middleton, E. L., Mirman, D., Kalénine, S., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2013). Incidental and context-responsive activation of structure- and function-based action features during object identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 257–270. doi:10.1037/a0027533
50. Lee, C.-L., Mirman, D., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2014). Abnormal dynamics of activation of object use information in apraxia: Evidence from eyetracking. Neuropsychologia, 59, 13–26. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.04.004
51. Lupyan, G., & Mirman, D. (2013). Linking language and categorization: Evidence from aphasia. Cortex, 49, 1187–1194. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2012.06.006
52. Lupyan, G., Mirman, D., Hamilton, R., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2012). Categorization is modulated by transcranial direct current stimulation over left prefrontal cortex. Cognition, 124, 36–49. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.04.002
53. Lupyan, G., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2012). The evocative power of words: Activation of concepts by verbal and nonverbal means. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 170–186. doi:10.1037/a0024904
54. Mahon, B. Z. (2015). What is embodied about cognition? Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 30, 420–429. doi:10.1080/23273798.2014.987791
55. 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. doi:10.1016/j.jphysparis.2008.03.004
56. Malt, B. C., & Johnson, E. C. (1992). Do artifact concepts have cores? Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 195–217. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(92)90011-L
57. Martens, U., Ansorge, U., & Kiefer, M. (2011). Controlling the unconscious: Attentional task sets modulate subliminal semantic and visuo-motor processes differentially. Psychological Science, 22, 282–291.
58. Masson, M. E. J., Bub, D. N., & Breuer, A. T. (2011). Priming of reach and grasp actions by handled objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1470–1484.
59. McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E., & the PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition: Psychological and biological models (Vol. 2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
60. McCloskey, M., & Glucksberg, S. (1979). Decision processes in verifying category membership statements: Implications for models of semantic memory. Cognitive Psychology, 11, 1–37. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(79)90002-1
61. McRae, K., de Sa, V. R., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1997). On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 99–130. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.126.2.99
62. Mechelli, A., Price, C. J., Friston, K. J., & Ishai, A. (2004). Where bottom-up meets top-down: Neuronal interactions during perception and imagery. Cerebral Cortex, 14, 1256–1265.
63. Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234. doi:10.1037/h0031564
64. Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167–202. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167
65. Moss, H. E., McCormick, S. F., & Tyler, L. K. (1997). The time course of activation of semantic information during spoken word recognition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 695–731.
66. Mummery, C. J., Patterson, K., Hodges, J. R., & Price, C. J. (1998). Functional neuroanatomy of the semantic system: Divisible by what? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 766–777.
67. Musz, E., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2015). Semantic variability predicts neural variability of object concepts. Neuropsychologia, 76, 41–51. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.11.029
68. Myung, J.-Y., Blumstein, S. E., Yee, E., Sedivy, J. C., Thompson-Schill, S. L., & Buxbaum, L. J. (2010). Impaired access to manipulation features in apraxia: Evidence from eyetracking and semantic judgment tasks. Brain and Language, 112, 101–112. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2009.12.003
69. Negri, G. A. L., Rumiati, R. I., Zadini, A., Ukmar, M., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2007). What is the role of motor simulation in action and object recognition? Evidence from apraxia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 24, 795–816.
70. Noppeney, U., Price, C. J., Friston, K. J., & Penny, W. D. (2006). Two distinct neural mechanisms for category-selective responses. Cerebral Cortex, 16, 437–445.
71. Oliver, R. T., Geiger, E. J., Lewandowski, B. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2009). Remembrance of things touched: How sensorimotor experience affects the neural instantiation of object form. Neuropsychologia, 47, 239–247. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.07.027
72. Oliver, R. T., Parsons, M. A., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2008, April). Hands on learning: Variations in sensorimotor experience alter the cortical response to newly learned objects. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, San Francisco, CA.
73. Patterson, K., Nestor, P. J., & Rogers, T. T. (2007). Where do you know what you know? The representation of semantic knowledge in the human brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8, 976–987. doi:10.1038/nrn2277
74. Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Raaijmakers, J. G. W. (1998). Does pizza prime coin? Perceptual priming in lexical decision and pronunciation. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 401–418. doi:10.1006/jmla.1997.2557
75. Phillips, J. A., Noppeney, U., Humphreys, G. W., & Price, C. J. (2002). Can segregation within the semantic system account for category specific deficits? Brain, 125, 2067–2080.
76. Pobric, G., Jefferies, E., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2010). Category-specific versus category-general semantic impairment induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Current Biology, 20, 964–968. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.03.070
77. Polyn, S. M., Norman, K. A., & Kahana, M. J. (2009). Task context and organization in free recall. Neuropsychologia, 47, 2158–2163.
78. Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
79. Prinz, J. J. (2002). Furnishing the mind: Concepts and their perceptual basis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
80. Pulvermüller, F. (1999). Words in the brain’s language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 253–279. disc. 280–336.
81. Rodríguez-Ferreiro, J., Gennari, S. P., Davies, R., & Cuetos, F. (2011). Neural correlates of abstract verb processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 106–118. doi:10.1162/jocn.2010.21414
82. Rogers, T. T., Hocking, J., Mechelli, A., Patterson, K., & Price, C. (2005). Fusiform activation to animals is driven by the process, not the stimulus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 434–445. doi:10.1162/0898929053279531
83. Rogers, T. T., & McClelland, J. L. (2004). Semantic cognition: A parallel distributed processing approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
84. Rogers, T. T., & Patterson, K. (2007). Object categorization: Reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 451–469. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.451
85. Schacter, D. L. (1995). Memory distortion: History and current status. In D. L. Schacter, J. T. Coyle, & Harvard Center for the Study of Mind, Brain, and Behavior (Eds.), Memory distortion: How minds, brains, and societies reconstruct the past (pp. 1–43). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
86. Schreuder, R., Flores d’Arcais, G. B., & Glazenborg, G. (1984). Effects of perceptual and conceptual similarity in semantic priming. Psychological Research, 45, 339–354.
87. Schyns, P. G., Goldstone, R. L., & Thibaut, J.-P. (1998). The development of features in object concepts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 1–17. doi:10.1017/S0140525X98520109. disc. 17–54.
88. Spivey, M. J. (2007). The continuity of mind. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
89. Swinney, D. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–659.
90. Tabossi, P. (1988). Effects of context on the immediate interpretation of unambiguous nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 153–162. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.1.153
91. Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632–1634. doi:10.1126/science.7777863
92. Taylor, L. J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2009). Action in cognition: The case of language. Language and Cognition, 1, 45–58.
93. Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2003). Neuroimaging studies of semantic memory: Inferring how from where. Neuropsychologia, 41, 280–292.
94. Thompson-Schill, S. L., Aguirre, G. K., D’Esposito, M., & Farah, M. J. (1999). A neural basis for category and modality specificity of semantic knowledge. Neuropsychologia, 37, 671–676. doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00126-2
95. Thompson-Schill, S. L., Bedny, M., & Goldberg, R. F. (2005). The frontal lobes and the regulation of mental activity. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 15, 219–224.
96. Trumpp, N. M., Kliese, D., Hoenig, K., Haarmeier, T., & Kiefer, M. (2013). Losing the sound of concepts: Damage to auditory association cortex impairs the processing of sound-related concepts. Cortex, 49, 474–486.
97. Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 830–846. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.830
98. Tyler, L. K., & Moss, H. E. (2001). Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 244–252. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01651-X
99. van Dam, W. O., Rueschemeyer, S.-A., Lindemann, O., & Bekkering, H. (2010). Context effects in embodied lexical–semantic processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 150. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00150
100. van Dam, W. O., van Dijk, M., Bekkering, H., & Rueschemeyer, S.-A. (2012). Flexibility in embodied lexical-semantic representations. Human Brain Mapping, 33, 2322–2333.
101. van Dantzig, S., Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Perceptual processing affects conceptual processing. Cognitive Science, 32, 579–590. doi:10.1080/03640210802035365
102. Vermeulen, N., Corneille, O., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2008). Sensory load incurs conceptual processing costs. Cognition, 109, 287–294.
103. Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Lewis, W., & Garrett, M. F. (2004). Representing the meanings of object and action words: The featural and unitary semantic space hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 48, 422–488. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2003.09.001
104. Weisberg, J., Turennout, M., & Martin, A. (2007). A neural system for learning about object function. Cerebral Cortex, 17, 513–521. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhj176
105. Willems, R. M., & Casasanto, D. (2011). Flexibility in embodied language understanding. Frontiers in Psychology, 2(116), 1–11. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00116
106. Willems, R. M., & Francken, J. C. (2012). Embodied cognition: Taking the next step. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 582. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00582
107. Willems, R. M., Hagoort, P., & Casasanto, D. (2010). Body-specific representations of action verbs: Neural evidence from right- and left-handers. Psychological Science, 21, 67–74. doi:10.1177/0956797609354072
108. Witt, J. K., Kemmerer, D., Linkenauger, S. A., & Culham, J. (2010). A functional role for motor simulation in identifying tools. Psychological Science, 21, 1215–1219. doi:10.1177/0956797610378307
109. Yee, E., Ahmed, S. Z., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2012). Colorless green ideas (can) prime furiously. Psychological Science, 23, 364–369. doi:10.1177/0956797611430691
110. Yee, E., Chrysikou, E. G., Hoffman, E., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2013a). Manual experience shapes object representation. Psychological Science, 24, 909–919. doi:10.1177/0956797612464658
111. Yee, E., Chrysikou, E. G., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2013b). The cognitive neuroscience of semantic memory. In K. Ochsner & S. Kosslyn (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive neuroscience, Vol. 1: Core topics (pp. 353–374). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
112. Yee, E., Huffstetler, S., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2011). Function follows form: Activation of shape and function features during object identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 348–363. doi:10.1037/a0022840
113. Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13, 168–171. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00430