Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Explanation and categorization: How “why?” informs “what?”.Tania Lombrozo - 2009 - Cognition 110 (2):248-253.
    Recent theoretical and empirical work suggests that explanation and categorization are intimately related. This paper explores the hypothesis that explanations can help structure conceptual representations, and thereby influence the relative importance of features in categorization decisions. In particular, features may be differentially important depending on the role they play in explaining other features or aspects of category membership. Two experiments manipulate whether a feature is explained mechanistically, by appeal to proximate causes, or functionally, by appeal to a function or goal. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations  
  • Functional explanation and the function of explanation.Tania Lombrozo & Susan Carey - 2006 - Cognition 99 (2):167-204.
    Teleological explanations (TEs) account for the existence or properties of an entity in terms of a function: we have hearts because they pump blood, and telephones for communication. While many teleological explanations seem appropriate, others are clearly not warranted-for example, that rain exists for plants to grow. Five experiments explore the theoretical commitments that underlie teleological explanations. With the analysis of [Wright, L. (1976). Teleological Explanations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press] from philosophy as a point of departure, we examine (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   78 citations  
  • Feature Centrality and Conceptual Coherence.Steven A. Sloman, Bradley C. Love & Woo-Kyoung Ahn - 1998 - Cognitive Science 22 (2):189-228.
    Conceptual features differ in how mentally tranformable they are. A robin that does not eat is harder to imagine than a robin that does not chirp. We argue that features are immutable to the extent that they are central in a network of dependency relations. The immutability of a feature reflects how much the internal structure of a concept depends on that feature; i.e., how much the feature contributes to the concept's coherence. Complementarily, mutability reflects the aspects in which a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   77 citations  
  • Explanation as orgasm.Alison Gopnik - 1998 - Minds and Machines 8 (1):101-118.
    I argue that explanation should be thought of as the phenomenological mark of the operation of a particular kind of cognitive system, the theory-formation system. The theory-formation system operates most clearly in children and scientists but is also part of our everyday cognition. The system is devoted to uncovering the underlying causal structure of the world. Since this process often involves active intervention in the world, in the case of systematic experiment in scientists, and play in children, the cognitive system (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   92 citations  
  • A cross-linguistic comparison of generic noun phrases in English and Mandarin.Susan A. Gelman & Twila Tardif - 1998 - Cognition 66 (3):215-248.
    Generic noun phrases (e.g. 'bats live in caves') provide a window onto human concepts. They refer to categories as 'kinds rather than as sets of individuals. Although kind concepts are often assumed to be universal, generic expression varies considerably across languages. For example, marking of generics is less obligatory and overt in Mandarin than in English. How do universal conceptual biases interact with language-specific differences in how generics are conveyed? In three studies, we examined adults' generics in English and Mandarin (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Representation of Principled Connections: A Window Onto the Formal Aspect of Common Sense Conception.Sandeep Prasada & Elaine M. Dillingham - 2009 - Cognitive Science 33 (3):401-448.
    Nominal concepts represent things as tokens of types. Recent research suggests that we represent principled connections between the type of thing something is (e.g., DOG) and some of its properties (k‐properties; e.g., having four legs for dogs) but not other properties (t‐properties; e.g., being brown for dogs). Principled connections differ from logical, statistical, and causal connections. Principled connections license (i) the expectation that tokens of the type will generally possess their k‐properties, (ii) formal explanations (i.e., explanation of the presence of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  • Feature centrality and property induction.Constantinos Hadjichristidis, Steven Sloman, Rosemary Stevenson & David Over - 2004 - Cognitive Science 28 (1):45-74.
    A feature is central to a concept to the extent that other features depend on it. Four studies tested the hypothesis that people will project a feature from a base concept to a target concept to the extent that they believe the feature is central to the two concepts. This centrality hypothesis implies that feature projection is guided by a principle that aims to maximize the structural commonality between base and target concepts. Participants were told that a category has two (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories.Eleanor Rosch & Carolyn Mervis - 1975 - Cognitive Psychology 7 (4):573--605.
    Six experiments explored the hypothesis that the members of categories which are considered most prototypical are those with most attributes in common with other members of the category and least attributes in common with other categories. In probabilistic terms, the hypothesis is that prototypicality is a function of the total cue validity of the attributes of items. In Experiments 1 and 3, subjects listed attributes for members of semantic categories which had been previously rated for degree of prototypicality. High positive (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   402 citations  
  • Developmental changes in the understanding of generics.Paul Bloom - 2007 - Cognition 105 (1):166-183.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Principled and statistical connections in common sense conception.Sandeep Prasada & Elaine M. Dillingham - 2006 - Cognition 99 (1):73-112.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   75 citations  
  • (1 other version)The role of theories in conceptual coherence.Gregory L. Murphy & Douglas L. Medin - 1985 - Psychological Review 92 (3):289-316.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   488 citations  
  • 17 What do children learn from testimony?Paul L. Harris - 2002 - In Peter Carruthers, Stephen P. Stich & Michael Siegal (eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 316.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Causal status effect in children's categorization.Woo-Kyoung Ahn, Susan A. Gelman, Jennifer A. Amsterlaw, Jill Hohenstein & Charles W. Kalish - 2000 - Cognition 76 (2):B35-B43.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Why are different features central for natural kinds and artifacts?: the role of causal status in determining feature centrality.Woo-Kyoung Ahn - 1998 - Cognition 69 (2):135-178.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   52 citations  
  • Preschool children’s use of cues to generic meaning.Andrei Cimpian & Ellen M. Markman - 2008 - Cognition 107 (1):19-53.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • (1 other version)The role of theories in conceptual coherence.G. L. Murphy & D. L. Medin - 1999 - In Eric Margolis & Stephen Laurence (eds.), Concepts: Core Readings. MIT Press. pp. 289--316.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   278 citations  
  • Generic language and judgements about category membership: Can generics highlight properties as central?Michelle Hollander, Gelman A., A. Susan & Lakshmi Raman - 2009 - Language and Cognitive Processes 24 (4):481--505.
    Many languages distinguish generic utterances from non-generic utterances. Two studies examined how generic language specially links properties and categories. We used a novel-word extension task to ask if 4- to 5-year-old children and adults distinguish between generic and specific language, and judge that predicating a property of a depicted novel animal using generic language, rather than non-generic language implies a more kind-relevant connection between category and property. Participants were asked to endorse an extension of the label taught to a novel (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations