期刊文献+

用“你”表述物体的功能会抑制成因对分类的影响 被引量:4

"You" is Different:Inhibition from A Second Person Functional Depiction to Object's History's Influence on Object Naming
下载PDF
导出
摘要 已有研究显示物体的成因等变量会影响人造物概念的分类;但这种影响的中介变量为何,基于设计和基于用途的理论有不同的假设。实验采用物体自由命名任务,在陈述物体的功能时,操纵角色词的类型(旁观者"有人"和使用者"你"),比较被试对物体的命名在领域水平的分类倾向。结果发现,呈现"旁观者"角色词时,呈现或不呈现物体自然形成的成因故事会造成不同的分类倾向;但是在呈现"使用者"角色词时,成因故事对分类倾向的影响消失了。提示物体的功能是成因和分类的中介变量,支持基于用途的人造物分类模型。 How do people categorize an object into artifact domain? Many researchers consider creator's intended design (Bloom, 1996) to be a mediate variable between the final judgment and many single factors, such as object's history ( Gelman and Bloom 2000), plausibility of object's function ( Asher and Kemler Nelson, 2008 ), and creator's label to the object (Jaswal 2006). As an alternative theory, the utility-based view (Sun and Fu 2005 ) postulates that using- goal is the mediate variable instead of creator's design. This view predicts that if subjects consider them as users rather than viewers of an object, the object would be named as an artifact because its functional information would be strongly activated. We used a short-depiction-based object free naming task to test the above hypothesis (see Sun, Wang, and Fu, 2006). More than 160 subjects were randomly assigned to one of four experiment groups. A 2 (pronoun in functional depiction: " You" vs. " someone" used the object ) × 2 (object's history: naturally-formed vs. not mentioned ) between-subject design was used. In a 7-page booklet we described 6 objects ( one object per page) plus a cover page. Subjects were asked to read the depictions and write down their naming, confidence rating, and naming reasons for each object. The results showed an interesting interaction between pronoun and object's history. At the " someone" condition, subjects significantly less named objects into artifact domain when the object history was "naturally-formed" than "not mentioned". But at " you" condition such difference disappeared. Besides, subjects in both conditions named object into artifact domain no matter whether the object was formed naturally or not and their confidence ratings were at the same level. Finally, functional properties of objects were more listed as naming reasons in "You" condition than in " Someone" condition. Current findings suggest that object' s function mediates object' s history and category judgment. Based on this, we further discussed artifact concept categorization from the utility-based perspective.
出处 《心理学报》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2009年第4期283-291,共9页 Acta Psychologica Sinica
基金 中国科技部973项目(2006CB303101)
关键词 人造物 分类 设计 意图 功能 artifact categorization design intent function
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献71

  • 1Mahon B Z, Caramazza A. Constraining questions about the organisation and representation of conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2003, 20(3-6):433~450
  • 2Mandler J M. Thought before language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2004, 8:508~513
  • 3Tyler L, Moss H. Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2001,5(6): 244~252
  • 4Rogers T T, Lambon Ralph M A, Garrard P, Bozeat S,McClelland J L, Hodges J R, Patterson K. Structure and Deterioration of Semantic Memory: A Neuropsychological and Computational Investigation* 1. Psychological Review,2004, 111(1): 205~235
  • 5Cree G S, McRae K. Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk,cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 2003, 132(2): 163~201
  • 6Moss H, Tyler L. Weighing up the facts of category-specific semantic deficits. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2003, 7(11): 480~481
  • 7Tyler L K, Bright P, Dick E, Tavares P, Pilgrim L, Fletcher P, Greef M, Moss H. Do semantic categories activate distinct cortical regions? Evidence for a distributed neural semantic system. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2003,20(3-6): 541~559
  • 8Murphy G L. The big book of concepts. 2002: Cambridge,MA, US: MIT Press
  • 9Ross B H, Murphy G L. Food for thought:Cross-classification and category organization in a complex real-world domain. Cognitive Psychology, 1999,38(4): 495~553
  • 10Chaigueau S E, Barsalou L W, Sloman S A. Assessing the Causal Structure of Function. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2004, 133(4): 601~625

共引文献5

同被引文献44

  • 1SUN Yuhao,WANG Zhe,FU Xiaolan.The specific contribution of object's origin on artifacts categorization[J].Chinese Science Bulletin,2006,51(23):2851-2859. 被引量:3
  • 2孙宇浩,王哲,傅小兰.物体的成因影响人造物分类的特异性[J].科学通报,2006,51(22):2648-2656. 被引量:2
  • 3游旭群,王鹏,晏碧华.不同平面心理旋转的角色效应[J].心理学报,2007,39(1):58-63. 被引量:6
  • 4Levin D T, Takarae Y, Miner A G, et al. Efficient visual search by category: Specifying the features that mark the difference between artifacts and animals in preattentive vision. Percept Psychophys, 2001, 63:676-697.
  • 5Martin A, Wiggs C L, Ungerleider L G, et al. Neural correlates of category-specific knowledge. Nature, 1996, 379:649-652.
  • 6Caramazza A, Shelton J R. Domain-specific knowledge systems in the brain: The animate-inanimate distinction. J Cogn Neurosci, 1998, 10:1-34.
  • 7Martin A. The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annu Rev Psychol, 2007, 58:25-45.
  • 8Barton M E, Komatsu L K. Defining features of natural kinds and artifacts. J Psycholinguist Res, 1989, 18:433-447.
  • 9Keil F C. Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. The MIT Press series in learning, development, and conceptual change. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989.
  • 10Rips L J. Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In: Andrew O, Stella V, eds. Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989. xiv, 592.

引证文献4

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部