A theory of how concept formation begins is presented that accounts for conceptual activity in the first year of life, shows how increasing conceptual complexity comes about, and predicts the order in which new types of information accrue to the conceptual system. In a compromise between nativist and empiricist views, it offers a single domain-general mechanism that redescribes attended spatiotemporal information into an iconic form. The outputs of this mechanism consist of types of spatial information that we know infants attend (...) to in the first months of life. These primitives form the initial basis of concept formation, allow explicit preverbal thought, such as recall, inferences, and simple mental problem solving, and support early language learning. The theory details how spatial concepts become associated with bodily feelings of force and trying. It also explains why concepts of emotions, sensory concepts such as color, and theory of mind concepts are necessarily later acquisitions because they lack contact with spatial descriptions to interpret unstructured internal experiences. Finally, commonalities between the concepts of preverbal infants and nonhuman primates are discussed. (shrink)

We present a systematic and qualitative review of academic literature on early conceptual development (0–24 months of age), with an emphasis on methodological aspects. The final sample of our review included 281 studies reported in 115 articles. The main aims of the article were four: first, to organise studies into sets according to methodological similarities and differences; second, to elaborate on the methodological procedures that characterise each set; third, to circumscribe the empirical indicators that different sets of studies consider as (...) proof of the existence of concepts in early childhood; last, to identify methodological limitations and to propose possible ways to overcome them. We grouped the studies into five sets: preference and habituation experiments, category extension tasks, object sorting tasks, sequential touching tasks and object examination tasks. In the “Results” section, we review the core features of each set of studies. In the “Discussion” and “Conclusions” sections, we describe, for one thing, the most relevant methodological shortcomings. We end by arguing that a situated, semiotic and pragmatic perspective that emphasises the importance of ecological validity could open up new avenues of research to better understand the development of concepts in early childhood. (shrink)

This article seeks to describe concepts of a special kind, these being ones that count as basic, while at the same time referring to the results of research in logic, the philosophy of language, and empirically pursued cognitive psychology. The key issue addressed is this: on what grounds are such basic concepts formed? It thus investigates issues pertaining to their formation and operation, especially in small children. Such concepts can take the form of mental representations of objects, properties and relations. (...) They function in classifications made by numerous and diverse cultural groups, are established at an early stage—being the first to be named and, so to speak, malleable—and their structure is not satisfactorily captured by any currently recognized theory. Moreover, they are organized around some sort of overall similarity irreducible to any particular component part. Psychologists and philosophers, on the other hand, frequently claim that properties are component parts to which overall similarity can be reduced. Yet if this solution were to be accepted, one would then have to say that three- or four-month-old children are unable to establish properties before delimiting the range of the relevant category, whilst also being unable to establish the range of that category before delimiting its properties. The problem with this is that children can distinguish some properties; however, they are incapable of establishing within a relatively short period of time which of these properties determine membership in the sense of falling within the range of the category in question. Moreover, basic concepts cannot be organized on the basis of a relation of similarity reducible to properties, due to the fact that any such similarity will be an equivalence relation, whilst the similarity relation accessible to the child constitutes a nonequivalence relation. A further point is that no consensus has yet been agreed upon within the psychological literature as to the construction of concepts formed by three- or fourmonth-old children. (shrink)

The author of the article regards the source of the distinction for singular names/general names not to have a cultural character, but a cognitive one, and on these grounds tries to solve one important modern problem: how is it that when a child learns words, the child commonly applies an aggressive strategy and does not make category mistakes connected with the use of some singular names – individual names. Next, the author argues that although a child at the age of (...) two can properly use a singular name, it does not constitute any evidence that it can properly use a proper name, as psychologists assume. For that to happen the child would have to understand the nature of a proper noun. (shrink)

La cognición incorporada entra en la visión epistemológica del realismo mínimo, es decir de cómo es el mundo independientemente de nosotros. Aquel enfoque implica la participación activa del sujeto, evitando el regreso al aristotelismo, con la adecuación del sujeto al objeto. El sujeto antes que inferir, que es un acto de impresión cognitiva, se informa, por lo que las entradas, a través de los sentidos, preforman el conocer. La metodología que sostiene y describe este proceso de entrada e inferencia, se (...) la llama Botton-up y Top-down; el primero es ascendente y aferente y el segundo es descendente y eferente. Con esta metodología se afirma que la cognición incorporada es un realismo moderado, cuya categoría fundamental es la relación. (shrink)

This article describes what the earliest concepts are like and presents a theory of the spatial primitives from which they are formed. The earliest concepts tend to be global, like animal and container, and it is hypothesized that they consist of simplified redescriptions of innately salient spatial information. These redescriptions become associated with sensory and other bodily experiences that are not themselves redescribed, but that enrich conceptual thought. The initial conceptual base becomes expanded through subdivision, sometimes aided by language that (...) points up these divisions or suggests new spatial analyses, and by the analogical extension of spatially derived concepts to nonspatial domains. This formulation is contrasted with Fodor's (1998) metaphysical theory of concept formation. (shrink)

We examined 11-month-olds’ tendency to generalize properties to category members, an ability that may contribute to the inductive reasoning abilities observed in later developmental periods. Across 3 experiments, we tested 11-month-olds’ (N= 113) generalization of properties within the cat and dog categories. In each experiment, infants were familiarized to animal-sound pairings (i.e., dog-barking; cat-meowing), and tested on this association and the generalization of the sound property to new members of the familiarized categories. After familiarization with a single exemplar, 11-month-olds generalized (...) the sound to new category members that were both highly similar and less similar to the familiarized animal (Expt. 1). When familiarized with mismatched animal-sound pairings (Expt. 2; i.e., dog-meowing; cat-barking), 11-month-olds did not learn or generalize the sound properties, suggesting that infants have pre-existing expectations about the links between the characteristic sound properties and the animal categories. When familiarized with unfamiliar sound-animal pairings (Expt. 3; i.e., dog-unfamiliar sound), 11-month-olds linked the animals with the novel sounds but did not generalize to new category members. Taken together, these findings highlight the conditions under which young infants generalize properties from one exemplar to other category members. (shrink)

A comparison of the literatures on how infants represent generic object classes, gender and race information in faces, and emotional expressions reveals both common and distinctive developments in the three domains. In addition, the review indicates that some very basic questions remain to be answered regarding how infants represent facial displays of emotion, including (a) whether infants form category representations for discrete classes of emotion, (b) when and how such representations come to incorporate affective meaning, (c) the developmental trajectory for (...) representation of emotional expression at different levels of inclusiveness (i.e., from broad to narrow or narrow to broad?), and (d) whether there is superior discrimination ability operating within more frequently experienced emotion categories. (shrink)