The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Mind in Motion
Abstract
By necessity as well as desire, people move and act in space. Our feet carry us from place to place along paths, just as our minds carry us from idea to idea along paths. The same brain structures that underlie places and paths underlie ideas and relations. We talk that way, too; I just did. Our hands place, raise, lower, put together, take apart, turn over push, pull, and throw objects. Our minds and our talk do the same with thoughts. Our minds allow us to take different perspectives on the paths in space, on the relations among ideas, on actions on objects. That turns out to be the key to creativity.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Familiarity with an environment produces other biases: distances from less familiar places to more familiar places are often underestimated compared with estimates of distances from more familiar to less familiar places 136,140 , and familiar locations are drawn larger on maps than are unfamiliar locations 141 (Box 1).”
From From cognitive maps to spatial schemas (2023) · cites this paper as [140]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Making Sense of Generative Learning
Fiorella, L. (2023) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-023-09769-7 · Cited by 135
“…from the embodied and grounded cognition literatures (e.g., Barsalou, 2008; Glenberg et al., 2013; Hostetter & Alibali, 2019; Lindgren & Johnson-Glenberg, 2013; Reed, 2010; Tversky, 2019), which posit that conceptual understanding is grounded in sensorimotor experiences interacting in the world.”
BackgroundFrom cognitive maps to spatial schemas
Farzanfar, D., Spiers, H. J., Moscovitch, M., & Rosenbaum, R. S. (2023) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-022-00655-9 · Cited by 115
Luo, W., Lehmann, A., Widengren, H., & Dachselt, R. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3501946 · Cited by 104
Thinking Tools: Gestures Change Thought About Time
Tversky, B., & Jamalian, A. (2021) · Topics in Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/tops.12566 · Cited by 67
“Primary among those tools are gestures, language, and graphics (e.g., Clark & Chalmers, 1998; Donald, 1991; Harari, 2014; Henrich, 2015; Norman, 2014; Tversky, 2019).”
Self-citationWhat We Can Learn From Visual Artists About Software Development
Li, J., Hashim, S., & Jacobs, J. (2021) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445682 · Cited by 63
Metadata
- Authors
- Tversky, B.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Tversky, Barbara
- ORCID
- Tversky, Barbara
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2019-06-13
- Pages
- 107-107
- OpenAlex
- W2952783013
- Cited by
- 119
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 5
- Type
- conference abstract
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Creativity and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Creativity in Education and Neuroscience
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Spatial Cognition and Navigation
- Keywords
- creativity, mental representation, spatial metaphor, conceptual metaphor, perspective taking
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
