期刊文献+

名-名组合概念关系竞争理论与研究的嬗变 被引量:2

下载PDF
导出
摘要 关系竞争理论(CARIN)是在组合概念的解释策略及其影响因素的研究中备受关注的一个理论假设,自该理论提出以来,认知心理学家对其展开了一系列的实验论证。按照研究逻辑和时间顺序,归纳梳理关系竞争理论的理论背景、基本主张以及相应的实验论证,以期对该理论有更全面的了解,推动该领域研究的深入。
作者 陈俊 张得龙
出处 《华南师范大学学报(社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2011年第2期114-119,共6页 Journal of South China Normal University:Social Science Edition
基金 全国教育科学"十一五"规划2007年度立项课题"德育管理过程中教师言语行为的语效及其评估与干预"(OEA070055) 教育部人文社会科学研究2007年度一般项目"教师语言的语效及其机制研究"(07SAXLX007)
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1R. A. Berman, E. V. Clark. Learning to Use Compounds for Contrast: Data from Hebrew. First language, 1989,9:247 - 270.
  • 2刘烨,傅小兰.概念组合的理论模型[J].心理科学进展,2005,13(1):17-26. 被引量:11
  • 3C. L. Gagne, E. J. Shoben. Influence of Thematic Relations on the Comprehension of Modifier -Noun Combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 1997,23:71 - 87.
  • 4E. Wisniewski. Similarity, Alignment, and Conceptual combination: Comments on Estes and Glucks&berg. Memory & Cognition,2000(28).
  • 5Z. Estes, L. L. Jones. Priming via Relational Similarity: A Copper Horse is Faster When seen through a Glass Eye. Journal of Memory and Language, 2006,55:89 -1011.
  • 6C. L. Gagne. The Competition - among - Relations - in - Nominals Theory of Conceptual Combination: Implications For Stimulus Class Formation And Class Expansion. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior,2002, 78:551 - 565.
  • 7J. A. Hampton. Overextension of Conjunctive concepts: Evidence for a Unitary Model of Concept Typicality and Class Inclusion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 1988,14 : 12 - 32.
  • 8G. Storms, W. Ruts, A. Vandenbroucke. Dominance, over Extensions and the Conjunction Effect Indifferent Syntactic Phrasings of Concept conjunctions. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1998,10:337 - 372.
  • 9G. L. Murphy. Comprehending Complex Concepts. Cognitive Science, 1988,12:529 - 562.
  • 10G. L. Murphy. Noun Phrase Interpretation and Conceptual Combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 1990,29:259 - 288.

二级参考文献105

  • 1McRae K, Cree G S. Factors underlying category-specific semantic deficits. In: Forde M E, Humphreys G Weds. Category specificity in brain and mind. New York: Psychology Press,2002. 211~249
  • 2Markman A B, Wisniewski E J. Similar and Different: The Differentiation of Basic-level Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1997, 23(1):54~74
  • 3Estes Z, Glucksberg S. Interactive property attribution in concept combination. Memory & Cognition, 2000, 28(1): 28~34
  • 4Estes Z, Glucksberg S. Similarity and attribution in concept combination: Reply to Wisniewski. Memory & Cognition,2000, 28(1): 39~40
  • 5Bock J S, Clifton C. The role of salience in conceptual combination. Memory & Cognition, 2000, 28(8): 1378~1386
  • 6Costello F J, Keane M T. Efficient Creativity: Constraintguided conceptual combination. Cognitive Science, 2000, 24(2): 299~349
  • 7Costello F J, Keane M T. Testing two theories of conceptual combination: Alignment versus diagnosticity in the comprehension and production of combined concept. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2001, 27(1): 255~271
  • 8Farah M. J. & McClelland J. L. A computational model of semantic memory impairment: Modality specificity and emergent category specificity. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 1991, 120(4): 339~357
  • 9Santos L R, Caramazza A. The domain-specific hypothesis: A developmental and comparative perspective on category-specific deficits. In: Forde M E, Humphreys G Weds. Category specificity in brain and mind. New York: Psychology Press, 2002. 1~23
  • 10Medin D L, Lynch E B, Solomon K O. Are there kinds of concepts? Annual Review of Psychology, 2000, 51:121~147

共引文献18

同被引文献47

  • 1刘烨,傅小兰.概念组合的理论模型[J].心理科学进展,2005,13(1):17-26. 被引量:11
  • 2刘烨,傅小兰.特征类型在组合概念范畴效应中的作用[J].心理学报,2005,37(4):450-457. 被引量:5
  • 3Chaffin, R., & Herrmann, D. J. (1984). The similarity and diversity of semantic relations. Memory & Cognition, 12, 134-141.
  • 4Chaffin, R., & Herrmann, D. J. (1988). Effects of relation similarity on part-whole decisions. Journal of General Psychology, 115, 131 -139.
  • 5Chaffin, R., Herrmann, D. J., & Winston, M. (1988). An empirical taxonomy of part-whole relations : Effects of part whole relation type on relation identification. Language and Cogn/tive Processes, 3, 17 -48.
  • 6Estes , Z. (2003). Attributive and relational processes in nominal com- bination. Journal of Memory and Language , 48, 304 -319.
  • 7Estes, Z., & Glucksberg, S. (2000). Interactive property attribution in concept combination. Memory & Cognition, 28, 28 - 34.
  • 8Estes, Z., & Jones, L. L. (2006). Priming via relational similarity: A copper horse is faster when seen through a glass eye. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 89 - 101.
  • 9Gagne, C. L. (2000). Relation-based combinations versus property- based combinations: A test of the CARIN theory and the dual- process theory of conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 365 - 389.
  • 10Gagne, C. L. (2001). Relation and lexical priming during the interpre- tation of Noun-noun combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychol- ogy: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 236 -254.

引证文献2

二级引证文献1

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