» Articles » PMID: 12903648

Abstraction in Perceptual Symbol Systems

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2003 Aug 9
PMID 12903648
Citations 65
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

After reviewing six senses of abstraction, this article focuses on abstractions that take the form of summary representations. Three central properties of these abstractions are established: ( i ) type-token interpretation; (ii) structured representation; and (iii) dynamic realization. Traditional theories of representation handle interpretation and structure well but are not sufficiently dynamical. Conversely, connectionist theories are exquisitely dynamic but have problems with structure. Perceptual symbol systems offer an approach that implements all three properties naturally. Within this framework, a loose collection of property and relation simulators develops to represent abstractions. Type-token interpretation results from binding a property simulator to a region of a perceived or simulated category member. Structured representation results from binding a configuration of property and relation simulators to multiple regions in an integrated manner. Dynamic realization results from applying different subsets of property and relation simulators to category members on different occasions. From this standpoint, there are no permanent or complete abstractions of a category in memory. Instead, abstraction is the skill to construct temporary online interpretations of a category's members. Although an infinite number of abstractions are possible, attractors develop for habitual approaches to interpretation. This approach provides new ways of thinking about abstraction phenomena in categorization, inference, background knowledge and learning.

Citing Articles

The Flexible Role of Social Experience in the Processing of Abstract Concepts.

Yao Z, Chai Y, He X Behav Sci (Basel). 2025; 15(2).

PMID: 40001821 PMC: 11851493. DOI: 10.3390/bs15020190.


The Valence of Abstraction: A Paradox Revisited.

Iliev R, Smirnova A J Psycholinguist Res. 2024; 54(1):4.

PMID: 39718646 PMC: 11668848. DOI: 10.1007/s10936-024-10122-4.


What we mean when we say semantic: Toward a multidisciplinary semantic glossary.

Reilly J, Shain C, Borghesani V, Kuhnke P, Vigliocco G, Peelle J Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; 32(1):243-280.

PMID: 39231896 PMC: 11836185. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02556-7.


Invariant representations in abstract concept grounding - the physical world in grounded cognition.

Friedrich J, Fischer M, Raab M Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; 31(6):2558-2580.

PMID: 38806790 PMC: 11680661. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02522-3.


Music performance as knowledge acquisition: a review and preliminary conceptual framework.

Reybrouck M, Schiavio A Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1331806.

PMID: 38390412 PMC: 10883160. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1331806.


References
1.
Gauthier I, Skudlarski P, Gore J, Anderson A . Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition. Nat Neurosci. 2000; 3(2):191-7. DOI: 10.1038/72140. View

2.
Palmeri T, Nosofsky R . Central tendencies, extreme points, and prototype enhancement effects in ill-defined perceptual categorization. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2001; 54(1):197-235. DOI: 10.1080/02724980042000084. View

3.
Schyns P, Goldstone R, Thibaut J . The development of features in object concepts. Behav Brain Sci. 1999; 21(1):1-17; discussion 17-54. DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x98000107. View

4.
Wisniewski E . Property instantiation in conceptual combination. Mem Cognit. 1998; 26(6):1330-47. DOI: 10.3758/bf03201205. View

5.
Gutheil G, Vera A, Keil F . Do houseflies think? Patterns of induction and biological beliefs in development. Cognition. 1998; 66(1):33-49. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(97)00049-8. View