What's on the Inside Counts: A Grounded Account of Concept Acquisition and Development.
What's on the Inside Counts: A Grounded Account of Concept Acquisition and Development.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00402
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Twomey KE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Thill S;Twomey KE
理解影响词汇和概念获得年龄（AoA）的因素是更广泛地理解认知发展的基础。传统上，对AoA的研究采取了两种方法，要么探索语言变量的影响，如输入频率（例如，Naigles和Hoff-Ginsberg）或潜在概念的语义，如具体性或意象性（例如，Bird等人，）。与此同时，认知的抽象理论假设概念，即使是相对抽象的概念，也可以建立在具体经验的基础上。虽然这种讨论的重点主要是在外部模式的基础上，最近一些人认为内感受特征的重要性，或在复杂的模式，如社会互动的基础上。在本文中，我们认为这两个研究链的整合和扩展。我们表明，心理语言因素传统上认为，以确定AoA是远远不够的，以占AoA数据中观察到的变异性。鉴于这一差距，我们提出接地作为一个新的概念工具，可以衡量的程度，概念接地在外部和内部的方式，关键。然后，我们提出了一个机械的概念表征理论，可以解释的接地除了现有的变量认为影响概念习得的发展和体现认知文献，并讨论其对未来的工作在概念和认知发展的影响。
Understanding the factors which affect the age of acquisition (AoA) of words and concepts is fundamental to understanding cognitive development more broadly. Traditionally, studies of AoA have taken two approaches, either exploring the effect of linguistic variables such as input frequency (e.g., Naigles and Hoff-Ginsberg,) or the semantics of the underlying concept, such as concreteness or imageability (e.g., Bird et al.,). Embodied theories of cognition, meanwhile, assume that concepts, even relatively abstract ones, can be grounded in the embodied experience. While the focus of such discussions has been mainly on grounding in external modalities, more recently some have argued for the importance of interoceptive features, or grounding in complex modalities such as social interaction. In this paper, we argue for the integration and extension of these two strands of research. We demonstrate that the psycholinguistic factors traditionally considered to determine AoA are far from sufficient to account for the variability observed in AoA data. Given this gap, we propose groundability as a new conceptual tool that can measure the degree to which concepts are grounded both in external and, critically, internal modalities. We then present a mechanistic theory of conceptual representation that can account for groundability in addition to the existing variables argued to influence concept acquisition in both the developmental and embodied cognition literatures, and discuss its implications for future work in concept and cognitive development.