Cited by 752Categorization, perception, and languageLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognitionlinguistics and terminology studies

Situating Abstract Concepts

Open access
Barsalou, Lawrence W., Wiemer-Hastings, Katja·2005·Grounding Cognition

Abstract

Roughly speaking, an abstract concept refers to entities that are neither purely physical nor spatially constrained. Such concepts pose a classic problem for theories that ground knowledge in modality-specific systems (e.g., Barsalou, 1999, 2003a,b). How could these systems represent a concept like TRUTH ? Abstract concepts also pose a significant problem for traditional theories that represent knowledge with amodal symbols. Surprisingly, few researchers have attempted to specify the content of abstract concepts using feature lists, semantic networks, or frames. It is not enough to say that an amodal node or a pattern of amodal units represents an abstract concept. It is first necessary to specify the concept's content, and then to show that a particular type of representation can express it. Regardless of how one might go about representing TRUTH , its content must be identified. Then the task of identifying how this content is represented can begin. The primary purpose of this chapter is to explore the content of three abstract concepts: TRUTH, FREEDOM , and INVENTION . In an exploratory study, their content will be compared to the content of three concrete concepts – BIRD, CAR , and SOFA – and also to three intermediate concepts that seem somewhat concrete but more abstract than typical concrete concepts – COOKING, FARMING , and CARPETING . We will first ask participants to produce properties typically true of these concepts. We will then analyze these properties using two…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9780511499968.007

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • For all abstract categories, when there are no strong perceptual statistical regularities within the category, humans use words as the glue that holds the category together.

    “As with all abstract categories, in the absence of strong perceptual statistical regularities within a category, humans use words as the glue that holds the category together (Barsalou & Weimer-Hastings 2005).”

    From The brain basis of emotion: a meta-analytic review (2012) · cites this paper as Barsalou & Weimer-Hastings 2005

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 51 · Cited by 752

Authors
Barsalou, L. W., & Wiemer-Hastings, K.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • Northern Illinois University (US)
Venue
Grounding Cognition
Published
2005-01-10
Pages
129-163
OpenAlex
W1507509966
Cited by
752
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 54 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 56 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 31
FWCI
49.46
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › linguistics and terminology studies
Keywords
abstract concepts, conceptual content, truth, freedom, inventions, concrete concepts, conceptual representation, semantic networks, feature lists, frames

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