Cargando…

The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories

According to the “embodied cognition” theory and the “sensory-motor model of semantic knowledge”: (a) concepts are represented in the brain in the same format in which they are constructed by the sensory-motor system and (b) various conceptual categories differ according to the weight of different k...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gainotti, Guido, Spinelli, Pietro, Scaricamazza, Eugenia, Marra, Camillo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3578198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23439453
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00040
_version_ 1782260009133932544
author Gainotti, Guido
Spinelli, Pietro
Scaricamazza, Eugenia
Marra, Camillo
author_facet Gainotti, Guido
Spinelli, Pietro
Scaricamazza, Eugenia
Marra, Camillo
author_sort Gainotti, Guido
collection PubMed
description According to the “embodied cognition” theory and the “sensory-motor model of semantic knowledge”: (a) concepts are represented in the brain in the same format in which they are constructed by the sensory-motor system and (b) various conceptual categories differ according to the weight of different kinds of information in their representation. In this study, we tried to check the second assumption by asking normal elderly subjects to subjectively evaluate the role of various perceptual, motor and language-mediated sources of knowledge in the construction of different semantic categories. Our first aim was to rate the influence of different sources of knowledge in the representation of animals, plant life and artifact categories, rather than in living and non-living beings, as many previous studies on this subject have done. We also tried to check the influence of age and stimulus modality on these evaluations of the “sources of knowledge” underlying different conceptual categories. The influence of age was checked by comparing results obtained in our group of elderly subjects with those obtained in a previous study, conducted with a similar methodology on a sample of young students. And the influence of stimulus modality was assessed by presenting the stimuli in the verbal modality to 50 subjects and in the pictorial modality to 50 other subjects. The distinction between “animals” and “plant life” in the “living” categories was confirmed by analyzing their prevalent sources of knowledge and by a cluster analysis, which allowed us to distinguish “plant life” items from animals. Furthermore, results of the study showed: (a) that our subjects considered the visual modality as the main source of knowledge for all categories taken into account; and (b) that in biological categories the next most important source of information was represented by other perceptual modalities, whereas in artifacts it was represented by the actions performed with them. Finally, age and stimulus modality did not significantly influence judgment of relevance of the sources of knowledge involved in the construction of different conceptual categories.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3578198
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35781982013-02-22 The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories Gainotti, Guido Spinelli, Pietro Scaricamazza, Eugenia Marra, Camillo Front Hum Neurosci Neuroscience According to the “embodied cognition” theory and the “sensory-motor model of semantic knowledge”: (a) concepts are represented in the brain in the same format in which they are constructed by the sensory-motor system and (b) various conceptual categories differ according to the weight of different kinds of information in their representation. In this study, we tried to check the second assumption by asking normal elderly subjects to subjectively evaluate the role of various perceptual, motor and language-mediated sources of knowledge in the construction of different semantic categories. Our first aim was to rate the influence of different sources of knowledge in the representation of animals, plant life and artifact categories, rather than in living and non-living beings, as many previous studies on this subject have done. We also tried to check the influence of age and stimulus modality on these evaluations of the “sources of knowledge” underlying different conceptual categories. The influence of age was checked by comparing results obtained in our group of elderly subjects with those obtained in a previous study, conducted with a similar methodology on a sample of young students. And the influence of stimulus modality was assessed by presenting the stimuli in the verbal modality to 50 subjects and in the pictorial modality to 50 other subjects. The distinction between “animals” and “plant life” in the “living” categories was confirmed by analyzing their prevalent sources of knowledge and by a cluster analysis, which allowed us to distinguish “plant life” items from animals. Furthermore, results of the study showed: (a) that our subjects considered the visual modality as the main source of knowledge for all categories taken into account; and (b) that in biological categories the next most important source of information was represented by other perceptual modalities, whereas in artifacts it was represented by the actions performed with them. Finally, age and stimulus modality did not significantly influence judgment of relevance of the sources of knowledge involved in the construction of different conceptual categories. Frontiers Media S.A. 2013-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3578198/ /pubmed/23439453 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00040 Text en Copyright © 2013 Gainotti, Spinelli, Scaricamazza and Marra. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Gainotti, Guido
Spinelli, Pietro
Scaricamazza, Eugenia
Marra, Camillo
The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
title The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
title_full The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
title_fullStr The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
title_full_unstemmed The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
title_short The evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
title_sort evaluation of sources of knowledge underlying different conceptual categories
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3578198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23439453
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00040
work_keys_str_mv AT gainottiguido theevaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT spinellipietro theevaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT scaricamazzaeugenia theevaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT marracamillo theevaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT gainottiguido evaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT spinellipietro evaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT scaricamazzaeugenia evaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories
AT marracamillo evaluationofsourcesofknowledgeunderlyingdifferentconceptualcategories