null
US
Iniciar Sesión
Regístrate Gratis
Registro
Hemos detectado que no tienes habilitado Javascript en tu navegador. La naturaleza dinámica de nuestro sitio requiere que Javascript esté habilitado para un funcionamiento adecuado. Por favor lee nuestros
términos y condiciones
para más información.
Siguiente
Copiar y Editar
¡Debes iniciar sesión para completar esta acción!
Regístrate gratis
1303750
DD303 Concepts
Descripción
DD303 Chp 9 Concepts
Sin etiquetas
dd303
concepts
psychology
dd303 cognitive psychology
undergraduate
Mapa Mental por
Ken Adams
, actualizado hace más de 1 año
Más
Menos
Creado por
Ken Adams
hace casi 10 años
97
3
0
Resumen del Recurso
DD303 Concepts
Intro
Concepts
"General ideas that apply to every member of a category"
Internal to mind; categories external
Can map to multiple categories
eg "chest'
Categorisation
Bruner
Individual things in terms of group membership
Implies
Conceptual grouping via behaviour
eg petting dogs
Different behaviour = thinking differently about different concepts
Sorting tasks
Ross & Murphy
Eggs
Breakfast
Dairy
Concepts & Cognition
Makes it easier to remember stuff
Semantic classification
Recognition
Units of semantic membership?
Store facts
R'ship between concepts
eg cat & heart
Enable inferences
Reasoning
Simplify remembering info
Lexical concepts
Category represents what we believe 'cat' to mean
Explaining Categorisation
1) Classical view
Things belonging to category
Common properties
Necessary condition
If item has properties common to category's members, it must be a member too
Sufficient condition
Evidence for:
Bruner et al
People associate common properties with category members
Criticisms
Typicality
Robin more typical bird than penguin
"All or nothing" ≠ reality
Rosch
Ps verified sentences 'Robin is a bird' quicker than 'Penguin is a bird'
Robin = more typical
Categories have rich internal structure
Not explained by classical view
Borderline cases
If "all or nothing" ≠ borderline
Red/orange?
McCloskey & Glucksberg
Ps rated items inconsistently & @ different times
eg bookends as furniture
Intransitiivty
If A is in B and B is in C then A is in C
Hampton
Ps judgements not fit with rule
eg car seats
Lack of definitions
Wittgenstein
All members share common properties?
Games?
Olympic
Card
Board
Most categories indefinable
2) Prototype view
Prototype
Most typical examplar of category
Object = member if meets enough properties of category - ie similarity to prototype
ie NO necessary condition
Property can have many values
eg apple colour
Typicality weightings
Highly typical instances match highly-weighted properties
Typicality correlated with how widely members share attributes
Criticisms
Meaning of typicality effects
Armstrong et al
Concepts not organised around prototype
BUT existence of typicality effects aren't conclusive evidence membership determined by similarity to prototype
Suggests: Dual process model (ie combine both theories)
1) Concept core - judge category membership
2) Identity procedures - match instances to category
Context sensitivity
Typicality effects alter w/ context
Medin & Shoben
Spoons
Metal more typical than wooden
Small more typical than large
BUT large wooden more typical than small wooden!
Complex concepts
not cope with concept combinations
eg red car
How combine prototypes?
eg Stone lion?
3) Common-sense theories
Issues with similarity based approaches (classical & prototype)
Meaning
Items can share infinite things in common
Plumb and Lawnmower
Evidence for:
Rips
Pizza & US 1/4
3rd object: more like pizza but more similar to 1/4
Dissociation between category & similarity
Underlying theory not just similarity based
Kiel
Developmental aspects
Hybrid zebra w/ horse insides
4yrs = zebra (appearance); 7yrs = horse (lineage)
Characteristic defining shift w/ age
Criticisms
Just because deeper knowledge suggested (not just similarity) doesn't make it more correct
"theory" poorly defined; common sense not compatible w/ science theory
More like 'knowledge' - Murphy
No explanation for complex concepts
May just replace 'similarity' w/ 'theory'
Both woolly terms
4) Psychological Essentialism
Assumes deeper principles
Objects categorised according to unobservable shared 'essential' properties
Superficial properties known, may not be able to define essential properties
Medin & Ortony
'Placeholder' for essential properties - empty if cant define
Evidence for:
Innate potential
test kids belief re innate properties
Animal switch from its bio parents to new ones
Pre-school kids: Kangaroo & goat = pouch & hop (ie innate kangaroo property)
Children more nativist
Gellman & Wellman
Young kids: insides more import re id of category
Criticisms
Context & perspective
Malt
Categorisation depend on context & goals of perceiver
Water = puddles or tears
Expert opinion
Malt
Ps ask expert re borderline natural item than for artefact (eg soap)
Natural categories may involve psych essentialism as Ps recognise info experts bring
Gelman
Children
Look beyond the obvious in various ways
Learning words
Generalising knowledge to new category members
Reasoning about insides of things
Beliefs re nature vs nurture
Constructing causal explanations
Certain categories (eg lion; female) have underlying reality - cannot be directly observed
Psych essentialism = early cognitive bias?
Against view that children are concrete thinkers
Where next?
All theories flawed!
Classical
Necessary & sufficient conditions only id for few categories
Prototype
Not explain context sensitivity or complex concepts
Theory theory
Imprecise, no definitions, cant explain complex concepts
Psych essentialism
Mixed evidence, much doesn't map to 'essences'
All categorisation the same?
Each approach for different scenarios ie not a single approach
Determinate # of different kinds of category
Classical - for definitions
Prototype - rapid categorisation or fuzzy matching
Theory based - considered judgements, explanation for category membership
Psych Essentialism - integrate scientific knowledge, expert view
Smith & Sloman
Replicate Rips (pizza)
Same dissociation is Ps think out loud
2 modes
Similarity based
Rule based
Language
Categories have labels
Words & concepts linked
Some words to label items in different categories
eg stone lion
Malt
"Shampoo bottle"
Not a bottle!
All concepts the same?
Well defined
amenable to definition
Classical view
Not explain typicality!
Fuzzy
Prototype
eg "red"
Common-sense
"sparrow"; "introvert"
Theory or Essentialism
All categorisers the same?
Different approaches depend on knowledge/skill?
Medin
Trees
Taxonomists, maintenance workers, landscapers
Different approach
Lynch et al
Typicality ratings vary between experts & novices
Mostrar resumen completo
Ocultar resumen completo
¿Quieres crear tus propios
Mapas Mentales
gratis
con GoConqr?
Más información
.
Similar
History of Psychology
mia.rigby
Biological Psychology - Stress
Gurdev Manchanda
Bowlby's Theory of Attachment
Jessica Phillips
Psychology subject map
Jake Pickup
Psychology A1
Ellie Hughes
Memory Key words
Sammy :P
Psychology | Unit 4 | Addiction - Explanations
showmestarlight
The Biological Approach to Psychology
Gabby Wood
Chapter 5: Short-term and Working Memory
krupa8711
Cognitive Psychology - Capacity and encoding
T W
Psychology and the MCAT
Sarah Egan
Explorar la Librería