CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 230Categorization, perception, and languageLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge

Principled and statistical connections in common sense conception

Prasada, Sandeep, Dillingham, Elaine M.·2006·Cognition
DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Nominal concepts represent things as tokens of types. We report six experiments that investigate the nature of the relations we represent between the type of thing something is (e.g. DOG) and its other properties. The experiments provide evidence that we represent principled connections between the type of thing something is (e.g. DOG) and some of its properties (k-properties; e.g. having four legs for dogs), but not other properties (t-properties; e.g. being brown for dogs). Principled connections are different from logical, statistical, and causal connections. Principled connections, (i) license the expectation that tokens of the type will generally possess the k-property, (ii) license explanation of the presence of k-properties in tokens of a type by reference to the type of thing it is, and (iii) license normative expectations concerning the presence of the k-property in tokens of the type. The experiments provide evidence for all three of these aspects of principled connections. The experiments also demonstrate that principled connections must be distinguished from merely strong statistical connections. We suggest that principled connections are one of the fundamental types of relations (in addition to logical, statistical, and causal relations) in terms of which our conceptual knowledge is structured. We argue that principled connections reveal a formal mode of understanding and explanation. This mode of understanding complements other modes of understanding that have been studied within the theory-based approach to conceptual representation. Finally, we suggest that kind representations are distinguished from representations of mere types by the representation of principled connections to k-properties.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.003

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Generics may imply that a statement is normatively correct or ideal.

    “Generics may also imply that a statement is normatively correct or ideal (39,40,42,43).”

    From Generic language in scientific communication (2019) · cites this paper as [39]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Prasada, S., & Dillingham, E. M.
Affiliations
City University of New York (US)
Corresponding author
Prasada, Sandeep
ORCID
Prasada, Sandeep
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-02
Volume
99
Issue
1
Pages
73-112
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.cognition.2005.01.003
OpenAlex
W1994655610
Cited by
230
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Keywords
type tokens, causal relationship, logical connections, conceptual representation, theory-based approach, explanation, normative expectations
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Cognition, Concept Formation, Humans, Judgment, Linguistics, Psychological Theory, Knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review