The DOI matches its Crossref record; 223 of the 223 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward a brain-based componential semantic representation
Abstract
Componential theories of lexical semantics assume that concepts can be represented by sets of features or attributes that are in some sense primitive or basic components of meaning. The binary features used in classical category and prototype theories are problematic in that these features are themselves complex concepts, leaving open the question of what constitutes a primitive feature. The present availability of brain imaging tools has enhanced interest in how concepts are represented in brains, and accumulating evidence supports the claim that these representations are at least partly "embodied" in the perception, action, and other modal neural systems through which concepts are experienced. In this study we explore the possibility of devising a componential model of semantic representation based entirely on such functional divisions in the human brain. We propose a basic set of approximately 65 experiential attributes based on neurobiological considerations, comprising sensory, motor, spatial, temporal, affective, social, and cognitive experiences. We provide normative data on the salience of each attribute for a large set of English nouns, verbs, and adjectives, and show how these attribute vectors distinguish a priori conceptual categories and capture semantic similarity. Robust quantitative differences between concrete object categories were observed across a large number of attribute dimensions. A within- versus between-category similarity metric showed much greater separation between categories than representations derived from distributional (latent semantic) analysis of text. Cluster analyses were used to explore the similarity structure in the data independent of a priori labels, revealing several novel category distinctions. We discuss how such a representation might deal with various longstanding problems in semantic theory, such as feature selection and weighting, representation of abstract concepts, effects of context on semantic retrieval, and conceptual combination. In contrast to componential models based on verbal features, the proposed representation systematically relates semantic content to large-scale brain networks and biologically plausible accounts of concept acquisition.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Maslow, A. H. (1943) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0054346 · Cited by 21,563
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001 · Cited by 20,632
Russell, J. A. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0077714 · Cited by 16,334 · cited 2×
“One of the primary families of theories regarding emotion are the dimensional accounts, which propose that affective states arise from combinations of a small number of more fundamental dimensions, most commonly valence (hedonic tone) and arousal (Russell, 1980).”
(2017) · Defining and Classifying Children in Need · doi:10.4324/9781315258324-16 · Cited by 11,320
An argument for basic emotions
Ekman, P. (1992) · Cognition and Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699939208411068 · Cited by 9,646
A Rationale and Test for the Number of Factors in Factor Analysis
Horn, J. L. (1965) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289447 · Cited by 8,714
The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception
Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., & Chun, M. M. (1997) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.17-11-04302.1997 · Cited by 7,738
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149 · Cited by 6,887
Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.104.2.211 · Cited by 6,282
Basic objects in natural categories
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-x · Cited by 5,643
Cited by
The neural and computational bases of semantic cognition
Ralph, M. A. L., Jefferies, E., Patterson, K., & Rogers, T. T. (2017) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn.2016.150 · Cited by 1,864
Challenges and opportunities for grounding cognition.
Barsalou, L. W. (2020) · Journal of Cognition · doi:10.5334/joc.116 · Cited by 319
Rehearsal initiates systems memory consolidation, sleep makes it last
Himmer, L., Schönauer, M., Heib, D. P. J., Schabus, M., & Gais, S. (2019) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aav1695 · Cited by 70
Anderson, A. J., Kiela, D., Binder, J. R., Fernandino, L., Humphries, C. J., Conant, L. L., Raizada, R. D. S., Grimm, S., & Lalor, E. C. (2021) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1152-20.2021 · Cited by 70
Self-citationFrom remembering to reconstruction: The transformative neural representation of episodic memory.
Xue, G. (2022) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2022.102351 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Binder, J. R., Conant, L. L., Humphries, C. J., Fernandino, L., Simons, S. B., Aguilar, M., & Desai, R. H.
- Venue
- Cognitive Neuropsychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-05-18
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 130-174
- ISSN
- 0264-3294 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-0627
- OpenAlex
- W2434184590
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 223
- FWCI
- 37.62
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Toward a brain-based componential semantic representation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02643294.2016.1147426
- The paper
- Binder, J. R., Conant, L. L., Humphries, C. J., Fernandino, L., Simons, S. B., Aguilar, M., & Desai, R. H. (2016). Toward a brain-based componential semantic representation. Cognitive Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2016.1147426
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.