Literature DB >> 12061755

Essentialist to some degree: beliefs about the structure of natural kind categories.

Charles W Kalish1.   

Abstract

Previous research has provided conflicting evidence regarding the hypothesis that people are essentialists. Much of the evidence in favor of essentialism is based on demonstrating that categories are thought to have absolute membership. Although the hypothesis is often framed as an absolute claim about all categories of a certain type (e.g., natural kinds), it has generally been tested by making relative comparisons with a select sample. The present study assesses judgments of absolute structure across a range of categories. A further condition for essentialism is that the criteria for category identity be seen as objective rather than conventional. The results of three experiments based on these considerations do not provide support for essentialist claims. Few categories were judged to have essentialist structure, in terms of either absolute membership or objective criteria. Results are discussed in light of an alternative to the essentialist hypothesis that emphasizes a pragmatic view of categories.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12061755     DOI: 10.3758/bf03194935

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  11 in total

1.  Feature centrality: naming versus imagining.

Authors:  S A Sloman; W K Ahn
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-05

2.  Domain differences in absolute judgments of category membership: evidence for an essentialist account of categorization.

Authors:  G Diesendruck; S A Gelman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-06

3.  Essentialism, word use, and concepts.

Authors:  N Braisby; B Franks; J Hampton
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1996-06

Review 4.  Similarity-based categorization and fuzziness of natural categories.

Authors:  J A Hampton
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1998-01

5.  The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories.

Authors:  S A Gelman
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 6.  The essentialist aspect of naive theories.

Authors:  M Strevens
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2000-02-14

7.  Essentialism and graded membership in animal and artifact categories.

Authors:  C W Kalish
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1995-05

8.  Ad hoc categories.

Authors:  L W Barsalou
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1983-05

9.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence.

Authors:  G L Murphy; D L Medin
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Natural and artifactual kinds: are children realists or relativists about categories?

Authors:  C Kalish
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  1998-03
View more
  9 in total

1.  Domain differences in the structure of artifactual and natural categories.

Authors:  Zachary Estes
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-03

2.  Confidence and gradedness in semantic categorization: definitely somewhat artifactual, maybe absolutely natural.

Authors:  Zachary Estes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-12

3.  On domain differences in categorization and context variety.

Authors:  Steven Verheyen; Daniel Heussen; Gert Storms
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-10

4.  The real deal: what judgments of really reveal about how people think about artifacts.

Authors:  Barbara C Malt; Michael R Paquet
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-04

5.  Causal essentialism in kinds.

Authors:  Woo-kyoung Ahn; Eric G Taylor; Daniel Kato; Jessecae K Marsh; Paul Bloom
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 2.143

6.  Essentialist thinking predicts decrements in children's memory for racially ambiguous faces.

Authors:  Sarah E Gaither; Jennifer R Schultz; Kristin Pauker; Samuel R Sommers; Keith B Maddox; Nalini Ambady
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  2013-07-01

7.  Diversion of attention in everyday concept learning: identification in the service of use.

Authors:  Lee R Brooks; Rosemary Squire-Graydon; Timothy J Wood
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-01

8.  A developmental examination of the conceptual structure of animal, artifact, and human social categories across two cultural contexts.

Authors:  Marjorie Rhodes; Susan A Gelman
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2009-06-13       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Challenging Cognitive Construals: A Dynamic Alternative to Stable Misconceptions.

Authors:  Julia S Gouvea; Matt R Simon
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 3.325

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.