Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T09:38:20.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Embodied meaning and negative priming

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2004

Arthur M. Glenberg ,
David A. Robertson ,
Michael P. Kaschak  and
Alan J. Malter
Arthur M. Glenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706
David A. Robertson*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332-0170
Michael P. Kaschak*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706
Alan J. Malter*
Affiliation:
Department of Marketing, Eller College of Business and Public Administration, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721-0108 http://www.eller.arizona.edu/depts/mrkt/alan.htm
*
glenberg@facstaff.wisc.edu
david.robertson@psych.gatech.edu
kaschak@darwin.psy.fsu.edu
amalter@bpa.arizona.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Standard models of cognition are built from abstract, amodal, arbitrary symbols, and the meanings of those symbols are given solely by their interrelations. The target article (Glenberg 1997t) argues that these models must be inadequate because meaning cannot arise from relations among abstract symbols. For cognitive representations to be meaningful they must, at the least, be grounded; but abstract symbols are difficult, if not impossible, to ground. As an alternative, the target article developed a framework in which representations are grounded in perception and action, and hence are embodied. Recent work (Glenberg & Robertson 1999; 2000; Glenberg & Kaschak 2002; Kaschak & Glenberg 2000) extends this framework to language.

Information

Type
Authors' Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 26 , Issue 5 , October 2003 , pp. 644 - 648
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2003

References

Anderson, M. C. & Spellman, B. A. (1995) On the status of inhibitory mechanisms in cognition: Memory retrieval as a model case. Psychological Review 102:68–100. [EN]10.1037/0033-295X.102.1.68CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, N. A. (1997) Functional memory versus reproductive memory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:19–20. [EW]10.1017/S0140525X97220017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., Pook, P. K., & Rao, R. P. N. (1997) Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:723–67. [MK]10.1017/S0140525X97001611CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. W. (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22:577–660. [rAMG]10.1017/S0140525X99002149CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bickhard, M. H. & Terveen, L. (1995) Foundational issues in artificial intelligence and cognitive science. Impasse and solution. Elsevier. [MK]Google Scholar
Broadbent, D. E. (1958) Perception and communication. Pergamon Press. [EN]10.1037/10037-000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. I. D. & Tarling, D. P. M. (1996) Retrieval processes in arithmetic production and verification. Memory and Cognition 24:156–72. [EN]10.3758/BF03200878CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlson, R. A. (1997) Meshing Glenberg with Piaget, Gibson, and the ecological self. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:21. [EW]10.1017/S0140525X9724001XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damasio, A. R. (1994) Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. Avon Books. [rAMG]Google Scholar
Dempster, F. N. (1991) Inhibitory processes: A neglected dimension of intelligence. Intelligence 15:157–73. [rAMG]10.1016/0160-2896(91)90028-CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeSchepper, B. G. & Treisman, A. (1996) Visual memory for novel shapes: Implicit coding without attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22:27–47. [EN]Google ScholarPubMed
Diamond, A. (1985) Development of the ability to use recall to guide action, as indicated by infants’ performance on AB. Child Development 56:868–83. [rAMG]10.2307/1130099CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dretske, F. (1988) Explaining behavior: Reasons in a world of causes. MIT Press. [rAMG]10.7551/mitpress/2927.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, G. M. (1978) Group selection and phasic reentrant signaling: A theory of higher brain function. In: The mindful brain: Cortical organization and the group-selective theory of higher brain function, ed. Edelman, G. M. & Mountcastle, V. B. MIT Press. [rAMG]Google Scholar
Edelman, G. M. (1989) The remembered present: A biological theory of consciousness. Basic Books. [EW]Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & Tucker, M. (1999) The role of action in visual perception. (Unpublished manuscript.) [rAMG]Google Scholar
Epstein, W. (1993) The representational framework in perceptual theory. Perception and Psychophysics 53:704–709. [rAMG, EW]10.3758/BF03211747CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldman, J. A. (1997) Embodiment is the foundation, not a level. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:746–47. [MK]10.1017/S0140525X9727161XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. A. (1987) Psychosemantics: The problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. MIT Press. [MK]10.7551/mitpress/5684.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, E. (1995) Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 2:145–73. [EN]10.3758/BF03210958CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990) Language comprehension as structure building. Erlbaum. [rAMG]10.21236/ADA221854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. & Jescheniak, J. D. (1995) Cataphoric devices in spoken discourse. Cognitive Psychology 29:24–28. [EN]10.1006/cogp.1995.1011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gernsbacher, M. A. & Keysar, B. (1995) The role of suppression in metaphor interpretation. Paper presented at the 36th Annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society. [EN]Google Scholar
Gibson, J. J. (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton-Mifflin. [rAMG]Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. (1997t) What memory is for: Creating meaning in the service of action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:1–55. [rAMG, MK, EW]10.1017/S0140525X97000010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. (1997r) Author Response. What memory is for: Creating meaning in the service of action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:41–55. [rAMG, MK, EW]10.1017/S0140525X97470012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. & Kaschak, M. P. (2002) Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9:558–65. [rAMG]10.3758/BF03196313CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glenberg, A. M. & Robertson, D. A. (1999) Indexical understanding of instruction. Discourse Processes 28:1–26. [rAMG]10.1080/01638539909545067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. & Robertson, D. A. (2000) Symbol grounding and meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied theories of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language 43:379– 401. [rAMG]10.1006/jmla.2000.2714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenberg, A. M., Schroeder, J. L. & Robertson, D. A. (1998) Averting the gaze disengages the environment and facilitates remembering. Memory and Cognition 26:651–58. [rAMG]10.3758/BF03211385CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graesser, A. C. (1997) Where in the body is the mental model for a story? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:25. [EW]10.1017/S0140525X97290011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, R. L. (1993) Hypothesis and illusion: Explorations in perception and science. In: New representationalisms: Essays in the philosophy of perceptions, ed. Wright, E. L. Averbury. [EW]Google Scholar
Harnad, S. (1987) Category induction and representation. In: Categorical perception: The groundwork of cognition, ed. Harnard, S. Cambridge University Press. [EW]Google Scholar
Harnad, S. (1990) The symbol grounding problem. Physica D 42:335–46. [MK]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbart, J. F. (1891) A textbook in psychology, 2nd edition, trans. Smith, M. K. Appleton. (original work published 1834) [EN]Google Scholar
Houghton, G. & Tipper, S. P. (1994) A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In: Inhibitory mechanisms in attention, memory and language, ed. Dagenbach, D. & Carr, T. Academic Press. [EN]Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago Press. [EN]10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaschak, M. P. & Glenberg, A. M. (2000) Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and grammatical constructions in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 43:508–29. [rAMG]10.1006/jmla.2000.2705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press. [rAMG, EN]10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press. [EN]Google Scholar
MacDorman, K. F. (1997) Memory must also mesh affect. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20:29. [EW]10.1017/S0140525X97340011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, A., Ungerleider, L. G. & Haxby, J. V. (2000) Category specificity and the brain: The sensory/motor model of semantic representation of objects. In: The new cognitive neurosciences, ed. Gazzaniga, M. S. MIT Press. [rAMG]Google Scholar
Neumann, E. & DeSchepper, B. G. (1991) Costs and benefits of target activation and distractor inhibition in selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, memory, and Cognition 17:1136–45. [EN]Google ScholarPubMed
Neumann, E. & DeSchepper, B. G. (1992) An inhibition-based fan effect: Evidence for an active suppression mechanism in selective attention. Canadian Journal of Psychology 46:1–40. [EN]10.1037/h0084309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neumann, E., McCloskey, M. S. & Felicio, A. C. (1999) Cross-language positive priming disappears, negative priming does not: Evidence for two sources of selective inhibition. Memory and Cognition. 27:1051–63. [EN]10.3758/BF03201234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, A. (1980) Physical symbol systems. Cognitive Science 4:135–83. [MK]Google Scholar
Piaget, J. (1970) Genetic epistemology. Columbia University Press. [EW]10.7312/piag91272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schyns, P., Goldstone, R. L. & Thibaut, J.-P. (1998) The development of features in object concepts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21:1–54. [rAMG]10.1017/S0140525X98000107CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Searle, J. R. (1980) Minds, brains and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3:417–24. [rAMG, MK]10.1017/S0140525X00005756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson, G. B. & Kang, H. (1994) Inhibitory processes in the recognition of homograph meanings. In: Inhibitory mechanisms in attention, memory and language, ed. Dagenbach, D. & Carr, T. Academic Press. [EN]Google Scholar
Tipper, S. P. & Driver, J. (1988) Negative priming between pictures and words: Evidence for semantic analysis of ignored stimuli. Memory and Cognition 16:64–70. [EN]10.3758/BF03197746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tipper, S. P., Lortie, C. & Baylis, G. C. (1992) Selective reaching: Evidence for action-centered attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 18:891–905. [rAMG, EN]Google ScholarPubMed
Treisman, A. & DeSchepper, B. G. (1996) Object tokens, attention, and visual memory. In: Attention and performance, vol. XVI: Information integration in perception and communication, ed. Inui, T. & McClelland, J. MIT press. [EN]Google Scholar
Wright, E. L. (1985) A design for a human mind. Conceptus 47:21–37. [EW]Google Scholar
Wright, E. L. (1992) The entity fallacy in epistemology. Philosophy 67:33–50. [EW]10.1017/S0031819100039814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, E. L. (1993) The irony of perception. In: New representationalisms: Essays in the philosophy of perception, ed. Wright, E. L. Avebury. [EW]Google Scholar