3 |
A common neural hub resolves syntactic and non-syntactic conflict through cooperation with task-specific networks.
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
Language Science Meets Cognitive Science: Categorization and Adaptation ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Language Science Meets Cognitive Science: Categorization and Adaptation
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
8 |
Further Exploring Processing Differences Between Geometric Shapes and Shape Words
|
|
|
|
In: Electronic Theses and Dissertations (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
Linguistic explanation and domain specialization: a case study in bound variable anaphora
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
10 |
Attention and executive control during lexical processing in aphasia
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
11 |
Using a Delayed Match-to-Samples Task to Investigate the Isolated Processing of Geometric Shapes and Their Corresponding Shape Words
|
|
|
|
In: Georgia Southern University Research Symposium (2015)
|
|
Abstract:
Evidence suggests an isolated system dedicated to processing geometric information (Spelke, Lee, & Izard, 2010). Isolating geometric processing from linguistic and semantic processing has remained difficult. Recently, Sturz, Edwards, and Boyer (2014) utilized a delayed match-to-sample (DMTS) task to present participants with a sample composed of either a shape, a shape word, or a bi-dimensional stimulus composed of a shape and a shape word. After a delay, participants were required to identify the sample shape or the sample word by selecting between two shapes or two shape words. Results suggested that sample shapes did not interfere with selecting a correct match in the presence of two shape words, but a sample shape word result in interference in selecting between two shapes. Interference took the form of increased reaction times and increased errors in the presence of selecting between two shapes but not two words. Results were interpreted as suggesting that shapes do not activate a semantic representation of shape words but shape words activate a spatial representation of shapes. The present experiments attempted to replicate and extend these results. Experiment 1 included a condition that was identical to the original condition (Unfilled) and one condition in which the shapes were filled (Filled) to address a potential explanation based upon sample shape saliency. Experiment 2 tested the assumption that shapes do not activate a semantic representation by reversing the matching requirement such that a sample shape word needed to be matched to its corresponding shape whereas a sample shape needed to be matched to its corresponding shape word. Such a reversal should require the semantic processing of shapes and result in increased reaction time and decreased accuracy. Experiment 1 replicated the asymmetrical results for both Filled and Unfilled conditions and provides evidence against an explanation based upon saliency. As predicted Experiment 2 produced a symmetrical pattern of results and indicated that word targets took a significantly longer time to match compared to shape targets. Collectively, results support an isolated system dedicated to processing geometric information by suggesting that both shapes and shape-words are automatically processed by two different psychological mechanisms.
|
|
Keyword:
Cognition and Perception; Cognitive Psychology; Delayed match-to-sample task; Domain specificity; Geometry; Modularity; Semantics; Suppression
|
|
URL: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/research_symposium/2015/2015/166
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
12 |
Resisting Everything Except Temptation: Evidence and an Explanation for Domain-Specific Impulsivity
|
|
|
|
In: Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations (2012)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
13 |
Comparison of Instrumentalists and Vocalists on a Lexical Tone Perception Task
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
14 |
The Contribution of Domain Specificity in the Highly Modular Mind
|
|
|
|
In: Robert J. Stainton (2010)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
16 |
Theory of mind broad and narrow: Reasoning about social exchange engages ToM areas, precautionary reasoning does not
|
|
|
|
In: Ermer, Elsa; Guerin, Scoft A.; Cosmides, Leda; Tooby, John; & Miller, Michael B.(2006). Theory of mind broad and narrow: Reasoning about social exchange engages ToM areas, precautionary reasoning does not. SOCIAL NEUROSCIENCE, 1, 196 - 219. UC Santa Barbara: Retrieved from: http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/6c53x1nx (2006)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
18 |
The Case for Modularity: Sin or Salvation?
|
|
|
|
In: Evolution and Cognition ; https://jeannicod.ccsd.cnrs.fr/ijn_00000135 ; Evolution and Cognition, 2001, 7 (1), pp.46-55 (2001)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
Grammatical knowledge vs. syntactic processing in the human brain
|
|
|
|
In: http://cuny2012.commons.gc.cuny.edu/files/2012/03/cuny2012_98.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
20 |
How Does the Mind Work? Insights from Biology
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.psych.nyu.edu/gary/marcusArticles/Marcus 2009 topics.pdf
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|