the mind is a nonphysical thing, independent of the physical body

-real you (mind) reacts with phys. body (brain) which reveives input from the mind

-world has 2 kinds of substance; physical matter and non-spatial thinking substance  

-a kind of property dualism

-the brain influences teh mind but NOT vice-versa

-all thoughts are determined by the brain but there are still different properties  

-a kind of monism

-there is only mind stuff. the real world does not exist, only a spiritual/mental world exists  

-there is no spiritual world; there is only a real/physical world. There are 3 forms of this:

1. reductionism (mind-brain identity theory)2. functionalism

3. eliminative materialism  

mind-brain identity theory

-mental states are physical states of the brain. there is a one to one correspondence between mental and physical states  

when matter becomes organized with sufficient complexity, certain properties emerge

-related to "how does materialism account for consciousness?" question 

-ex. single ant vs. ant colony (number and complexity)

-consciousness is an emergent property 

inherent in the external object or scene

-being able to recognize common properties of an object in diffferent views 

1. response time

2. use of hedges

3. inconsistency of judgments 

function

form 

properties 

Chinese characters

"ooo"

-Hull assumed that every example of a concept had some element that was critical to it  

-believes that the essential components of a concept are complex features that are connected by a specified relationship, rather than being a single common element

-ZUM concept 

-rejected defintional view

-if we were to create definitions for everything, we'd increase our vocabulary x 10

-definable features may be necessary but not sufficient  -created a system for measuring the TYPICALITY OF CATEGORY

-used by the classical view

-the C.V tries to represnet the typical category members as the BEST examples. the view does not have any way of distinguishing typical or atypical category members 

-related to Rosh's typicality of category

-a goose is virtually just a bird, not the other way arounds  

IF A =B, and B=C then C=A?

-Hampton contests the view; it's not this simple (car seat is furniture?); fuzziness of boudnaries  

-relevant to "categories" 

-subjects rated number of items whether or not they were category members

-items were segregated into clear members/nonmenetrs. he found that most items were JUST bearley considered in or out of categories. results weren't distinctly in or out 

-uncertainty about borderline members

ex. is a tomato a fruit?

-22% of subejcts changed thier minds AFTER A FEW MONTHS  

-aspect of a concept that contains ONLY THE DEFINITION

-use this when peopel must do more careful categorization, Armstrong found this was used in situations with less time pressure and involving more careful thoughts 

-characteristic features that describe in more detail, the difference b/w category members. these features wander from the core definition

-TYPICALITY results from identification procedures

-people use I.P for FAST and RELIABLE categorization, but use concept core for more caregul organization 

dot experiment

-subjects were able to learn the category of the distoritions by noting the similarities of the patterns

-the SMALLER the distorition, the more TYPICAL a pattern was, and the more ACCURATELY it was classified  

-items are typical if they have features in COMMON within their categories

-and when they DO NOT have featuers common to OTHER categories  

used 3 variables to organize categories

1. central tendency

2. frequency of instantionation

3. ideals 

-1/3 of Barsalous' study of TYPICALITY

-states that items most similar to other items in teh category had the highest central tend. scores. this is same as family ressemblence idea but only including the WIHTIN-category resemblence***

-1/3 of Barsalous' study of TYPICALITY

-assessed by subjects ratings-it's the frequncey of which an item was THOUGHT to be a member of a cateogry (not how often it appears in nature..ex. chicken vs. oriole)

-THINKING of an item as being a member increases its typicality  

-1/3 of Barsalous' study of TYPICALITY

-the DEGREE to which each item fit the PRIMARY GOAL of each category..aka a dimension that seems CRITICAL to each category (ex. it's use. ex. ideal for a vehicle is for it to be efficient for transport)

-IDEALS important for determinign TYPICALITY ABOVE AND BEYOND ANY EFFECTS OF FAMILY RESSEMBLENCE!!!  

-proposal by COLLINS AND QUILLAN of how we view SEMANTIC REPRESENTATIONS in our brains

-tested time it took for peopel to RESPOND to different hierarchical levels  

-a category is represented in a HIERARCHICAL NETWORK

-each category has a brief description (called SEMANTIC KNOWLEDGE)  

-the idea states that PROPERTIES are linked by ANY possible RELATIONSHIP

-ex. red, ambulance, fire trucks, bus, car, etc.  

-no hierarchical system, just a RELATIONSHIP MODEL

-has to do with PRIMING (ex. the colour red, primes the notion of fire truck, hydrant, etc.)  

1. family ressemblence/probabilistic theory ex. typical features of a chair, organized around characteristic properties

2.classical view (techinical definitions); a chair is a device used to sit consisting of legs, seat....

3. functional defintiiosn (fit in by virtue of how you use it, or how it works..ex. a chair is something you can use to sit on other than the floor....bean bag chair)  

theory

-there is a hierarchical structure of categories

basic level: children name here, natural name at which objects are names (varies from person to person); shows SOME cross cultral consistency  

superordinate level (living things)

basic level (birds)

subordinate level (thrush, robin, etc)

OR

super super ordinate: living thing

super ordinate; bird

basic: thrush

subordinate: littoral rock thrush  

-as you get further away from the middle (prototype), you get more-typical category members

-horizontal dimension is the  INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF TEH CATEOGRY

-high or low

-specific features that accompany certain category members, which help you determine whether someting is part of a cateogory or not

-you'd use high cue validity questions when playing "20 questions" to get to the answer the fastest (avoid generalizations)  

Smith and Madin

-everything is stored

-while in prototype theory, only PROTOTYPES are stored, in ET, individual examples and prototypes are stored

-SOMETHING BELONGS TO A CATEGORY IF IT RESEMBLES OTHER INSTANCES (detail and context are retained)  

-an improvised category

-a category that comes to notice/forms due to a particular need 

-a structred representaiton that diveds up the properties of an item into DIMENTIONS (slots) and VALUES on those dimensions (fillers)

-slots have restrictions on them

-accounts for overlap and connected relations 

-absent-mindedness

-blocking

 --transience

____

misattribution

suggestibility

bias

persistence 

remembering to preform an action at a specific time

-evidence shows older adults to better at event-based than time-based tasks  

-neuro imaging studies implicate the PREFRONTAL CORTEX in the prospective memory  

-when peopel study a list of words and are asked to remember learning the words such as sweet or candy, people FALSELY recognize the word SWEET as often as teh correctly recognized candy

-effect is reduced with the introductino of teh DISTINCTIVENESS HEURISTIC  which occurs when pictures are assigned to the words 

persistence: helps us remember raumatic events to avoid them in the future

misattribution: little reason to encode the SOURCE of information

suggestibility: reminds us of our tendency to remeber the "symantic gist" to enable better categorization and comprehension (but as ar esult causes false recalls, small price to pay)

bias: schemas, which cause biases, enable us to perform important organizign functions in our lives

transcience: forget irrevant with time

blocking: limit information available to us to avoid being overwhelmed

absent-mindedness: avoid being overwhelmed 

simply beenfits, not necessarily from evolution (by-products)

-transicence seems to be an adaptation to filter info.

-false recall (suggestibility) and Missatributions NOT adaptations bu by products of a system's design  

-proposed by Medin and Schaffer, used to determine how similar two items are

 -you add up similarities of an item in memory with an item in view; item bleongs to the cateogry with the HIGHEST SIMILARITY SCORE 

enounters with an object (exemplar view)

-oppositive of 'types' (one type of thing, counts once) 

-exemplar view

-only count one type of object once  

-one's concepts should be consistent with whatever else one knows abotu the world (knowledge affects interpretation of concepts and concepts can affect our interpretation of the features)

-without a proper understnidng of purpose of weapons, we would not understnad what was the most typical  

-____ categories are defined soley by how well their members fulfill a desired goal or plan

ex. things to eat on a diet (not much similarity in observerable features in common)

-related to knowledge approach to categories