7 - Situating Abstract Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 July 2009

Lawrence W. Barsalou and

Katja Wiemer-Hastings

Edited by

Diane Pecher and

Rolf A. Zwaan

Show author details

Lawrence W. Barsalou: Affiliation:
Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Katja Wiemer-Hastings: Affiliation:
Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, Illinois, USA
Diane Pecher: Affiliation:
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Rolf A. Zwaan: Affiliation:
Florida State University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Roughly speaking, an abstract concept refers to entities that are neither purely physical nor spatially constrained. Such concepts pose a classic problem for theories that ground knowledge in modality-specific systems (e.g., Barsalou, 1999, 2003a,b). How could these systems represent a concept like TRUTH? Abstract concepts also pose a significant problem for traditional theories that represent knowledge with amodal symbols. Surprisingly, few researchers have attempted to specify the content of abstract concepts using feature lists, semantic networks, or frames. It is not enough to say that an amodal node or a pattern of amodal units represents an abstract concept. It is first necessary to specify the concept's content, and then to show that a particular type of representation can express it. Regardless of how one might go about representing TRUTH, its content must be identified. Then the task of identifying how this content is represented can begin.

The primary purpose of this chapter is to explore the content of three abstract concepts: TRUTH, FREEDOM, and INVENTION. In an exploratory study, their content will be compared to the content of three concrete concepts – BIRD, CAR, and SOFA – and also to three intermediate concepts that seem somewhat concrete but more abstract than typical concrete concepts – COOKING, FARMING, and CARPETING. We will first ask participants to produce properties typically true of these concepts. We will then analyze these properties using two coding schemes.

Type: Chapter
Information: Grounding Cognition
The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language, and Thinking
, pp. 129 - 163

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511499968.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 577–609Google Scholar PubMed

Barsalou, L. W. (2003a). Abstraction in perceptual symbol systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences 358, 1177–1187CrossRef Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. (2003b). Situated simulation in the human conceptual system. Language and Cognitive Processes 18, 513–562CrossRef Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., Niedenthal, P. M., Barbey, A., & Ruppert, J. (2003). Social embodiment. In B. Ross (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning & Motivation, Vol. 43 (pp. 43–92). San Diego: Academic PressCrossRef

Barsalou, L. W., Sloman, S. A., & Chaigneau, S. E. (in press). The HIPE theory of function. In L. Carlson & E. van der Zee (Eds.), Representing functional features for language and space: Insights from perception, categorization and development. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Boroditsky, L., & Ramscar, M. (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract thought. Psychological Science, 13, 185–188CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bransford, J. D., & Johnson, M. K. (1973). Considerations of some problems of comprehension. In W. G. Chase (Ed.), Visual Information Processing. New York: Academic PressCrossRef

Bransford, J. D., & McCarrell, N. S. (1974). A sketch of a cognitive approach to comprehension: Some thoughts about understanding what it means to comprehend. In W. B. Weimer & D. S. Palermo (Eds.), Cognition and the Symbolic Processes (pp. 377–399). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (1997). Modelling parsing constraints with high-dimensional context space. Language and Cognitive Processes 12, 177–210CrossRef Google Scholar

Clark, A. (1997). Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Clark, H. H. (1992). Arenas of Language Use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Cree, G. S., & McRae, K. (2003). 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 132, 163–201CrossRef Google Scholar

Fehr, B., & Russell, J. A. (1984). Concept of emotion viewed from a prototype perspective. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113, 464–486CrossRef Google Scholar

Galbraith, R. C., & Underwood, B. J. (1973). Perceived frequency of concrete and abstract words. Memory and Cognition 1, 56–60CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., & Forbus, K. D. (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology 25, 524–575CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Glaser, W. R. (1992). Picture naming. Cognition 42, 61–106CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9, 558–569CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hampton, J. A. (1979). Polymorphous concepts in semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18, 441–461CrossRef Google Scholar

Kan, I. P., Barsalou, L. W., Solomon, K. O., Minor, J. K., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2003). Role of mental imagery in a property verification task: fMRI evidence for perceptual representations of conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology 20, 525–540CrossRef Google Scholar

Krauth-Gruber, S., Ric, F., Niedenthal, P. M., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). The representation of emotion concepts: The role of perceptual simulation. Manuscript under review

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato's Problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review 104, 211–240CrossRef Google Scholar

Markman, A. B., & Ross, B. H. (2003). Category use and category learning. Psychological Bulletin 129, 592–615CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Martin, A. (2001). Functional neuroimaging of semantic memory. In. R. Cabeza & A. Kingstone (Eds.), Handbook of Functional Neuroimaging of Cognition (pp. 153–186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

McCloskey, M., & Glucksberg, S. (1978). Natural categories: Well-defined or fuzzy sets?Memory and Cognition 6, 462–472CrossRef Google Scholar

McRae, K., & Cree, G. S. (2002). Factors underlying category-specific semantic deficits. In E. M. E. Forde & G. Humphreys (Eds.), Category-specificity in mind and brain (pp. 211–249). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press

Medin, D. L., & Ross, B. H. (1989). The specific character of abstract thought: Categorization, problem-solving, and induction. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.) Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, Vol. 5, (pp. 189–223). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. (1978). A context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 85, 207–238CrossRef Google Scholar

Murphy, G. L. (1997). Reasons to doubt the present evidence for metaphoric representation. Cognition 62, 99–108CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. L. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 92, 289–316CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Nelson, K. (Ed.) (1986). Event representations: Structure and Function in Development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Paivio, A. (1986). Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. New York: Oxford University Press

Peterson, S. E., Fox, P. T., Posner, M. I., Mintus, M. A., & Raichle, M. E. (1989). Positron emission tomographic studies of the processing of single words. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1, 153–170CrossRef Google Scholar

Pulvermüller, F. (1999). Words in the brain's language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 253–336CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Barsalou, L. W., & McRae, K. (2003). Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cognitive Science 27, 767–780CrossRef Google Scholar

Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7, 573–605CrossRef Google Scholar

Ross, B. H., & Kilbane, M. C. (1997). Effects of principle explanation and superficial similarity on analogical mapping in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 23, 427–440Google Scholar

Ross, B. H., Perkins, S. J., & Tenpenny, P. L. (1990). Reminding-based category learning. Cognitive Psychology 22, 460–492CrossRef Google Scholar

Schwanenflugel, P. J., Harnishfeger, K. K., & Stowe, R. W. (1988). Context availability and lexical decisions for abstract and concrete words. Journal of Memory and Language 27, 499–520CrossRef Google Scholar

Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1991). Why are abstract concepts hard to understand? In P. J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), The Psychology of Word Meaning (pp. 223–250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Shoben, E. J. (1983). Differential context effects in the comprehension of abstract and concrete verbal materials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 9, 82–102Google Scholar

Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Stowe, R. W. (1989). Context availability and the processing of abstract and concrete words in sentences. Reading Research Quarterly 24, 114–126CrossRef Google Scholar

Solomon, K. O., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Perceptual simulation in property verification. Memory & Cognition 32, 244–259CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Thompson-Schill, S. L., D'Esposito, M., Aguirre, G. K., & Farah, M. J. (1997). Role of left prefrontal cortex in retrieval of semantic knowledge: A reevaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 94, 14792–14797CrossRef Google Scholar

Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review 80, 352–373CrossRef Google Scholar

Wattenmaker, W. D., & Shoben, E. J. (1987). Context and the recallability of concrete and abstract sentences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 13, 140–150Google Scholar

Wiemer-Hastings, K., & Graesser, A. C. (1998). Contextual representation of abstract nouns: A neural network approach. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1036–1042). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Wiemer-Hastings, K., & Graesser, A. C. (2000). Representing abstract concepts with abstract structures. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 983–989). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Wiemer-Hastings, K., Krug, J., & Xu, X. (2001). Imagery, context availability, contextual constraint, and abstractness. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 1134–1139. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum

Wiemer-Hastings, K., & Xu, X. (2004). Content differences for abstract and concrete concepts. Manuscript under review

Winer, B. J. (1971). Statistical Principles in Experimental Design (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill

Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). New York: Macmillan

Wu, L., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). Perceptual simulation in property generation. Manuscript in review

Yeh, W., & Barsalou, L. W. (2004). The situated character of concepts. Manuscript in review

Book contents

7 - Situating Abstract Concepts

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive