Cargando…
Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind
One of the main limitations of natural language‐based approaches to meaning is that they do not incorporate multimodal representations the way humans do. In this study, we evaluate how well different kinds of models account for people's representations of both concrete and abstract concepts. Th...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7816238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33432630 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12922 |
_version_ | 1783638401936785408 |
---|---|
author | De Deyne, Simon Navarro, Danielle J. Collell, Guillem Perfors, Andrew |
author_facet | De Deyne, Simon Navarro, Danielle J. Collell, Guillem Perfors, Andrew |
author_sort | De Deyne, Simon |
collection | PubMed |
description | One of the main limitations of natural language‐based approaches to meaning is that they do not incorporate multimodal representations the way humans do. In this study, we evaluate how well different kinds of models account for people's representations of both concrete and abstract concepts. The models we compare include unimodal distributional linguistic models as well as multimodal models which combine linguistic with perceptual or affective information. There are two types of linguistic models: those based on text corpora and those derived from word association data. We present two new studies and a reanalysis of a series of previous studies. The studies demonstrate that both visual and affective multimodal models better capture behavior that reflects human representations than unimodal linguistic models. The size of the multimodal advantage depends on the nature of semantic representations involved, and it is especially pronounced for basic‐level concepts that belong to the same superordinate category. Additional visual and affective features improve the accuracy of linguistic models based on text corpora more than those based on word associations; this suggests systematic qualitative differences between what information is encoded in natural language versus what information is reflected in word associations. Altogether, our work presents new evidence that multimodal information is important for capturing both abstract and concrete words and that fully representing word meaning requires more than purely linguistic information. Implications for both embodied and distributional views of semantic representation are discussed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7816238 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78162382021-01-27 Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind De Deyne, Simon Navarro, Danielle J. Collell, Guillem Perfors, Andrew Cogn Sci Regular Articles One of the main limitations of natural language‐based approaches to meaning is that they do not incorporate multimodal representations the way humans do. In this study, we evaluate how well different kinds of models account for people's representations of both concrete and abstract concepts. The models we compare include unimodal distributional linguistic models as well as multimodal models which combine linguistic with perceptual or affective information. There are two types of linguistic models: those based on text corpora and those derived from word association data. We present two new studies and a reanalysis of a series of previous studies. The studies demonstrate that both visual and affective multimodal models better capture behavior that reflects human representations than unimodal linguistic models. The size of the multimodal advantage depends on the nature of semantic representations involved, and it is especially pronounced for basic‐level concepts that belong to the same superordinate category. Additional visual and affective features improve the accuracy of linguistic models based on text corpora more than those based on word associations; this suggests systematic qualitative differences between what information is encoded in natural language versus what information is reflected in word associations. Altogether, our work presents new evidence that multimodal information is important for capturing both abstract and concrete words and that fully representing word meaning requires more than purely linguistic information. Implications for both embodied and distributional views of semantic representation are discussed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-01-11 2021-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7816238/ /pubmed/33432630 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12922 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Cognitive Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Cognitive Science Society (CSS). This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Regular Articles De Deyne, Simon Navarro, Danielle J. Collell, Guillem Perfors, Andrew Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind |
title | Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind |
title_full | Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind |
title_fullStr | Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind |
title_full_unstemmed | Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind |
title_short | Visual and Affective Multimodal Models of Word Meaning in Language and Mind |
title_sort | visual and affective multimodal models of word meaning in language and mind |
topic | Regular Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7816238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33432630 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12922 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dedeynesimon visualandaffectivemultimodalmodelsofwordmeaninginlanguageandmind AT navarrodaniellej visualandaffectivemultimodalmodelsofwordmeaninginlanguageandmind AT collellguillem visualandaffectivemultimodalmodelsofwordmeaninginlanguageandmind AT perforsandrew visualandaffectivemultimodalmodelsofwordmeaninginlanguageandmind |