A Quantitative Empirical Analysis of the Abstract/Concrete Distinction

This study presents original evidence that abstract and concrete concepts are organized and represented differently in the mind, based on analyses of thousands of concepts in publicly available data sets and computational resources. First, we show that abstract and concrete concepts have differing patterns of association with other concepts. Second, we test recent hypotheses that abstract concepts are organized according to association, whereas concrete concepts are organized according to (semantic) similarity. Third, we present evidence suggesting that concrete representations are more strongly feature‐based than abstract concepts. We argue that degree of feature‐based structure may fundamentally determine concreteness, and we discuss implications for cognitive and computational models of meaning.     

The plurality of concepts

Traditionally, theories of concepts in psychology assume that concepts are a single, uniform kind of mental representation. But no single kind of representation can explain all of the empirical data for which concepts are responsible. I argue that the assumption that concepts are uniformly the same kind of mental structure is responsible for these theories’ shortcomings, and outline a pluralist theory of concepts that rejects this assumption. On pluralism, concepts should be thought of as being constituted by multiple representational kinds, with the particular kind of concept used on an occasion being determined by the context. I argue that endorsing pluralism does not lead to eliminativism about concepts as an object of scientific interest.     

The allocation of valenced concepts onto 3D space

The valence–space metaphor research area investigates the metaphorical mapping of valenced concepts onto space. Research findings from this area indicate that positive, neutral, and negative concepts are associated with upward, midward, and downward locations, respectively, in the vertical plane. The same research area has also indicated that such concepts seem to have no preferential location on the horizontal plane. The approach–avoidance effect consists in decreasing the distance between positive stimuli and the body (i.e. approach) and increasing the distance between negative stimuli and the body (i.e. avoid). Thus, the valence–space metaphor accounts for the mapping of valenced concepts onto the vertical and horizontal planes, and the approach–avoidance effect accounts for the mapping of valenced concepts onto the “depth” plane. By using a cube conceived for the study of allocation of valenced concepts onto 3D space, we show in three studies that positive concepts are placed in upward locations and near the participants’ body, negative concepts are placed in downward locations and far from the participants’ body, and neutral concepts are placed in between these concepts in both planes.     

概念加工深度影响道德概念水平方位隐喻联结

通过6个实验探究了不同概念加工深度下道德概念与水平方位的隐喻联结。实验1采用迫选任务范式, 实验2、实验3和实验4均采用空间Stroop范式, 实验5和实验6均采用启动范式。结果发现：(1)在思维迫选中存在道德与左、不道德与右的隐喻联结; (2)在较深、中等概念加工深度下发现了隐喻一致性效应, 在较浅概念加工深度下未发现这种效应; (3)在较浅概念加工深度下始源域和目标域之间的映射均不存在, 即未在启动范式中发现隐喻联结。结果表明：道德概念与水平方位存在隐喻联结, 这种隐喻联结中左表征道德、右表征不道德, 并同时受到始源域和目标域加工深度的影响。     

The myth of open concepts: Meehl’s analysis of construct meaning versus black box essentialism

Two views of theoretical concepts in psychology are compared. Meehl’s “open concept” account holds that theoretical concepts are implicitly defined by theories but that empirical criteria can be changed over time (e.g., added or dropped, weightings changed, exchanged for theoretical reductions). This account confuses concepts and theories, does not reflect how diagnostic concepts actually work in medicine and psychology, leads to theory incommensurability, and is unclear about when concepts are the same or different. I propose that an alternative “black box essentialist” account of theoretical concepts, drawn from recent philosophical work on natural kind concepts, better explains how we manage to refer to the same construct even as our theories and criteria change. One implication is that Meehl is incorrect to claim that a reason for psychology’s lack of progress is that its concepts are inherently different from those in the hard sciences.     

Not quite neo-sentimentalism

The view that some evaluative concepts are identical to some affective concepts naturally falls out of neo-sentimentalism, but it is unstable. This paper argues for a view of evaluative concepts that is neo-sentimentalist in spirit but which eschews the identity claim. If we adopt a Peacockean view of concepts, then we should think of some evaluative concepts as having possession conditions that are affective in some way. I argue that the best version of this thought claims that possessing those concepts requires being rationally compelled to form evaluative beliefs in response to certain emotions.     

Concepts as Pluralistic Hybrids

In contrast to earlier views that argued for a particular kind of concept (e.g. prototypes), several recent accounts have proposed that there are multiple distinct kinds of concepts, or that there is a plurality of concepts for each category. In this paper, I argue for a novel account of concepts as pluralistic hybrids. According to this view, concepts are pluralistic because there are several concepts for the same category whose use is heavily determined by context. In addition, concepts are hybrids because they typically link together several different kinds of information that are used in the same cognitive processes. This alternative view accounts for the available empirical data, allows for greater cognitive flexibility than Machery's recent account, and overcomes several objections to traditional hybrid views.     

Effects of centrality on retrieval of text-based concepts

Four experiments examined the effect of centrality on retrieval time using a wide range of testing conditions. Subjects read passages containing concepts that were rated as central, moderately central, or peripheral to a passage, and then were asked to retrieve those concepts. Experiment 1 used a probe recognition task that contained foils that were unrelated to the passage, and it was found that central concepts were recognized more quickly than peripheral concepts. In Experiment 2, the foils were passage related, resulting in a much larger recognition advantage of central concepts over peripheral concepts. Experiment 3 used a speeded-recall task. Again central concepts were recalled more quickly than less central concepts. Experiment 4 ruled out a simple strength argument. The results of all four experiments are discussed in terms of text being represented as an integrated network. Within this network, central concepts are more interconnected, providing additional access routes that facilitate retrieval.     

Prior knowledge and memory: the episodic encoding of implicitly activated associates and rhymes

The presentation of a familiar word activates related concepts, and, once encoded, related concepts interfere with memory for the work actually presented. Presented words that activate larger numbers of related concepts are generally more difficult to recall than those that activate smaller numbers. The purpose of the present experiments was to explore the effects of study-trial orientation and test delay on the encoding of both rhyme- and meaning-related concepts. The results of Experiments 1 and 2 indicate that meaning-related concepts are encoded and interfere with memory for the presented target regardless of study-trial orientation. Interference is obtained even when the study-trial context emphasizes phonemic information and subjects are incidentally oriented to rating rhyme properties. However, this interference effect disappears when the test trial is delayed. In contrast, the results of Experiments 1-4 indicate that rhyme-related concepts are encoded and interfere with memory for the presented target only when subjects explicitly attend to the rhyme dimension. Once oriented, this interference effect is found after a relatively long delay. These differences are attributed to differences in attentional processing. The encoding of meaning-related concepts results from relatively automatic processes and the encoding of rhyme-related concepts requires subjects to attend to rhyme.     

Isolated and interrelated concepts

A continuum between purely isolated and purely interrelated concepts is described. Along this continuum, a concept is interrelated to the extent that it is influenced by other concepts. Methods for manipulating and identifying a concept’s degree of interrelatedness are introduced. Relatively isolated concepts can be empirically identified by a relatively large use of nondiagnostic features, and by better categorization performance for a concept’s prototype than for a caricature of the concept. Relatively interrelated concepts can be identified by minimal use of nondiagnostic features, and by better categorization performance for a caricature than for a prototype. A concept is likely to be relatively isolated when subjects are instructed to create images for their concepts rather than find discriminating features, when concepts are given unrelated labels, and when the categories that are displayed alternate rarely between trials. The entire set of manipulations and measurements supports a graded distinction between isolated and interrelated concepts. The distinction is applied to current models of category learning, and a connectionist framework for interpreting the empirical results is presented.     

Comparative concepts

Comparative concepts such as greener than or higher than are ways of ordering objects. They are fundamental to our grasp of gradable concepts, that is, the type of meanings expressed by gradable general terms, such as ??is green?? or ??is high??, which are embeddable in comparative constructions in natural language. Some comparative concepts seem natural, whereas others seem gerrymandered. The aim of this paper is to outline a theoretical approach to comparative concepts that bears both on the account of naturalness for comparative concepts and on the theory of gradable concepts. The approach is novel in that it carries some basic assumptions from Peter G?rdenfors?? conceptual spaces account of categorical concepts over to comparative concepts. The offered approach is more general than G?rdenfors?? account in that it supplies a framework of graded categorisation that includes his categorisation rule as a limiting case. Importantly, it provides also a new argument for adopting G?rdenfors?? particular model of categorisation.     

Interpretation of Scientific or Mathematical Concepts: Cognitive Issues and Instructional Implications

Scientific and mathematical concepts are significantly different from everyday concepts and are notoriously difficult to learn. It is shown that particular instances of such concepts can be identified or generated by different possible modes of concept interpretation. Some of these modes use formally explicit knowledge and thought processes; others rely on less formal case-based knowledge and more automatic recognition processes. The various modes differ in attainable precision, likely errors, and ease of use. A combination of such modes can be used to formulate an “ideal” model for interpreting scientific concepts both reliably and efficiently. Comparisons are made with the actual concept interpretations of expert scientists and novice students. The discussion elucidates some cognitive and metacognitive reasons why the learning of scientific or mathematical concepts is difficult. It also suggests instructional guidelines for teaching such concepts more effectively.     

Concept Appraisal

This paper reports the first empirical investigation of the hypothesis that epistemic appraisals form part of the structure of concepts. To date, studies of concepts have focused on the way concepts encode properties of objects and the way those features are used in categorization and in other cognitive tasks. Philosophical considerations show the importance of also considering how a thinker assesses the epistemic value of beliefs and other cognitive resources and, in particular, concepts. We demonstrate that there are multiple, reliably judged, dimensions of epistemic appraisal of concepts. Four of these dimensions are accounted for by a common underlying factor capturing how well people believe they understand a concept. Further studies show how dimensions of concept appraisal relate to other aspects of concepts. First, they relate directly to the hierarchical organization of concepts, reflecting the increase in specificity from superordinate to basic and subordinate levels. Second, they predict inductive choices in category-based induction. Our results suggest that epistemic appraisals of concepts form a psychologically important yet previously overlooked aspect of the structure of concepts. These findings will be important in understanding why individuals sometimes abandon and replace certain concepts; why social groups do so, for example, during a “scientific revolution”; and how we can facilitate such changes when we engage in deliberate “conceptual engineering” for epistemic, social, and political purposes.     

ACCEPTANCE-DEPENDENCE: A SOCIAL KIND OF RESPONSE-DEPENDENCE

Abstract:  Neither Johnston's nor Wright's account of response-dependence offers a complete picture of response-dependence, as they do not apply to all concepts that are intrinsically related to our mental responses. In order to (begin to) remedy this situation, a new conception of response-dependence is introduced that I call "acceptance-dependence". This account applies to concepts such as goal , constitutional , and money , the first two of which have mistakenly been taken to be response-dependent in another sense. Whereas on Johnston's and Wright's accounts response-dependent concepts depend on counterfactual responses of individuals, acceptance-dependent concepts depend on the actual responses of groups of people. This implies that concepts of the latter kind are less objective than concepts of the former kind.     

Career Development Concepts: Significance and Utility

Trustees of four appropriate professional associations determined the relative value of significant career-development concepts from a preselected list. Comparisons among the trustee groups are made, composite data are reported, suggestions for using the rank-ordered concepts in research as an external criterion are provided, and ideas for incorporating the concepts as topics for group guidance classes are given.     

Concepts and Epistemic Individuation

Christopher Peacocke has presented an original version of the perennial philosophical thesis that we can gain substantive metaphysical and epistemological insight from an analysis of our concepts. Peacocke's innovation is to look at how concepts are individuated by their possession conditions, which he believes can be specified in terms of conditions in which certain propositions containing those concepts are accepted. The ability to provide such insight is one of Peacocke's major arguments for his theory of concepts. I will critically examine this "fruitfulness" argument by looking at one philosophical problem Peacocke uses his theory to solve and treats in depth.
Peacocke (1999, 2001) defines what he calls the "Integration Challenge." The challenge is to integrate our metaphysics with our epistemology by showing that they are mutually acceptable. Peacocke's key conclusion is that the Integration Challenge can be met for "epistemically individuated concepts."A good theory of content, he believes, will close the apparent gap between an account of truth for any given subject matter and an overall account of knowledge. I shall argue that there are no epistemically individuated concepts, and shall critically analyze Peacocke's arguments for their existence. I will suggest more generally that the possession conditions of concepts and their principles of individuation shed little light on the epistemology or metaphysics of things other than concepts. My broader goal is to shed light on what concepts are by showing that they are more fundamental than the sorts of cognitive and epistemic factors a leading theory uses to define them.¹     

Revisiting Wittgenstein on Family Resemblance and Colour(s)

We argue that all general concepts are family resemblance concepts. These include concepts introduced by ostension, such as colour(s). Concepts of colour and of each of the specific colours are family resemblance concepts because similarities concerning an open‐ended range of colour or of appearance features crop up and disappear. After discussing the notion of “same colour” and Wittgenstein's use of the phrase “our colours”, we suggest family resemblance concepts in one tradition can often be extended to family resemblance concepts in another tradition, illustrated by Wittgenstein's use of the words Spiel and “game”.     

感知运动信息在概念表征中的作用

研究概念的表征问题对理解概念的本质非常重要,传统认知和具身认知视角下的概念表征理论争议的焦点在于感觉运动信息在表征中的作用。传统认知视角下的离身认知认为感知觉运动信息会转化成抽象的符号,概念表征不包含感知觉运动信息。概念表征的具身观点认为感知觉运动信息是概念表征的基础。对感知运动信息在概念表征中起作用这一命题已经达成共识。未来研究应该关注感知运动信息起作用的机制,以及抽象概念表征等问题,进一步完善发展概念表征理论。     

Concept empiricism, content, and compositionality

Concepts are the constituents of thoughts. Therefore, concepts are vital to any theory of cognition. However, despite their widely accepted importance, there is little consensus about the nature and origin of concepts. Thanks to the work of Lawrence Barsalou, Jesse Prinz and others concept empiricism has been gaining momentum within the philosophy and psychology literature. Concept empiricism maintains that all concepts are copies, or combinations of copies, of perceptual representations—that is, all concepts are couched in the codes of perceptual representation systems. It is widely agreed that any satisfactory theory of concepts must account for how concepts semantically compose (the compositionality requirement) and explain how their intentional content is determined (the content determination requirement). In this paper, I argue that concept empiricism has serious problems satisfying these two requirements. Therefore, although stored perceptual representations may facilitate some traditionally conceptual tasks, concepts should not be identified with copies of perceptual representations.