Language is not Just for Talking

Lupyan, Gary; Rakison, David H.; McClelland, James L.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02028.x

Cited by 236 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A novel stimulus can be re-coded in terms of known constituents (e.g., “attractive, blond female”) but that encoded representation may not facilitate discrimination of targets from foils. Our view, that labels facilitate encoding because there is less of a burden on working memory resources (Reder et al, 2007), is consistent with an argument put forward by Lupyan (e.g., Lupyan, Rakison & McClelland, 2007). When contextual information is unavailable for recognition, judgments are based on a familiarity process.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Why It’s Easier to Remember Seeing a Face We Already Know Than One We Don’t

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that it is easier to bind a stimulus to context when the stimulus already has a stable (i.e., pre-existing) memory representation by comparing episodic memory of faces of celebrities vs. unknown individuals. Each face was superimposed on a picture of a well-known location (e.g., Eiffel Tower) during encoding and at a later unexpected recognition test but the background could change from encoding to test. Although recognition was to be based on the face, irrespective of background, performance was better when encoding context was reinstated. Further, a given background could be shown with many faces ("high fan") or only a few ("low fan") and this variable modulated the value added of context reinstatement. Importantly, manipulations of context only mattered for famous faces. As predicted, these effects were observed in recollection ("Remember") responses not in familiarity (“Know”) responses. Experiment 2 used the same design except that half of the subjects were administered midazolam, a drug that produces temporary anterograde amnesia, prior to encoding faces and backgrounds. Subjects injected with saline (control condition) showed the same pattern as Experiment 1; however subjects injected with midazolam showed a large decrease in the use of the "Remember" responses for famous faces and neither context reinstatement nor background fan affected performance. These results support the view that it is easier to bind stimuli to context when stimuli have a pre-existing, stable memory representation (e.g., faces of people whose identity we know) than when stimuli do not have pre-existing, stable memory representations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Why It’s Easier to Remember Seeing a Face We Already Know Than One We Don’t

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, infants categorize better when the same name is paired with objects from the same category (Yoshida & Smith, 2005), even when these objects are perceptually dissimilar (Plunkett, Hu, & Cohen, 2008). Names also facilitate category learning for adults, even when names are not actively used during the learning task (Lupyan, Rakison, & McClelland, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Automaticity of basic-level categorization accounts for labeling effects in visual recognition memory.

Richler¹,

Gauthier²,

Palmeri³

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are there consequences of calling objects by their names? Lupyan (2008) suggested that overtly labeling objects impairs subsequent recognition memory because labeling shifts stored memory representations of objects toward the category prototype (representational shift hypothesis). In Experiment 1, we show that processing objects at the basic category level versus exemplar level in the absence of any overt labeling produces the same qualitative pattern of results. Experiment 2 demonstrates that labeling does not always disrupt memory as predicted by the representational shift hypothesis: Differences in memory following labeling versus preference are more likely an effect of judging preference, not an effect of overt labeling. Labeling does not influence memory by shifting memory representations toward the category prototype. Rather, labeling objects at the basic level produces memory representations that are simply less robust than those produced by other kinds of study tasks.

show abstract

“…In other words, tightness of a fit is salient in Korean, while it is less important in English. McDonough et al (2003) found that while Korean-speaking adults had no difficulties in categorizing actions in terms of the tightness of fit, English-speaking adults had considerable difficulties in this regard.…”

Section: L1 Language-construal Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The evidence from the research has related the cross-linguistic Source: Wolff and Holmes (2011). differences in the ways speakers of a language categorize, sort, and perceive various entities to the way in which conceptual representations are packaged and presented by the speakers of the language. The research has been extended to various domains such as time (e.g., Miles et al, 2011), space (e.g., Haun et al, 2011), motion , color (Athanasopoulos et al, 2010), objects (Imai and Gentner, 1997), number (Gordon, 2004), and categorization (Lupyan et al, 2007).…”

Section: L1 Language-construal Interfacesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diferentes maneiras de observar eventos: o aprendizado de língua estrangeira e a aquisição de padrões de perspectivação conceitual de ações na L2

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este é um artigo de acesso aberto, licenciado por Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0), sendo permitidas reprodução, adaptação e distribuição desde que o autor e a fonte originais sejam creditados. University of IsfahanABSTRACT -Given the growing body of evidence on the interaction between language and thought, the overall aim of the current study is to verify whether there is a developmental pattern in the cognitive behavior of Persian L2 learners of English as a foreign language with regard to action construal level. Specifically, this study investigates whether acquiring English as a foreign language would affect the construal level of Persian EFL learners with different levels of bilingualism. A group of 40 Persian monolinguals, a group of 40 low-level Persian EFL bilinguals (bilinguals with low L2 proficiency), and a group of 40 highlevel Persian EFL bilinguals (bilinguals with high L2 proficiency) were recruited. Participants were divided into the above groups based on their performance on Oxford Quick Placement Test (QPT). The participants' action construal level was measured using Behavior Identification Form (BIF) (Vallacher and Wegner, 1989). The results of a one way ANOVA and a post-hoc Tukey test indicated that while low-level participants behaved relatively similar to Persian monolinguals, the construal of high-level learners was significantly different from monolinguals and low-level bilinguals. These findings provide evidence of a developmental pattern regarding the acquisition of construal level, supporting the claim of previous research that learning an additional language can affect the construal of language learners.Keywords: language acquisition, foreign language, construal, action construal, construal level. RESUMO -Tendo em vista o crescente conjunto de evidências sobre ainteração entre língua e pensamento, o objetivo geral deste estudo é verificar se há um padrão de desenvolvimento no comportamento cognitivo de aprendizes persas de inglês como língua estrangeira (ILE) no que diz respeito ao nível de perspectivação conceitual de ações. Especificamente, este estudo investiga se a aquisição do ILE afeta o nível de perspectivação conceitual de aprendizes persas de ILE com diferentes níveis de bilinguismo. Foram recrutados um grupo de 40 persas monolíngues, um grupo de 40 persas bilíngues com baixo nível em ILE (bilíngues com baixa proficiência na L2) e um grupo de 40 persas bilíngues com alto nível em ILE (bilíngues com alta proficiência na L2). Os participantes foram divididos em tais grupos com base em seu desempenho no teste de nivelamento Quick Placement Test (QPT), de Oxford. Mediu-se o nível de perspectivação conceitual de ações dos participantes por meio do formulário Behavior Identification Form (BIF), de Vallacher e Wegner. Os resultados do ANOVA de uma via e de um teste de Tukey post-hoc indicaram que os participantes com baixo nível tiveram comportamento relativamente semelhante ao dos monolíngues, ao passo que os aprendizes com alto nível demonstraram uma pers...

show abstract

Language is not Just for Talking

Cited by 236 publications

References 35 publications

Why It’s Easier to Remember Seeing a Face We Already Know Than One We Don’t

Why It’s Easier to Remember Seeing a Face We Already Know Than One We Don’t

Automaticity of basic-level categorization accounts for labeling effects in visual recognition memory.

Diferentes maneiras de observar eventos: o aprendizado de língua estrangeira e a aquisição de padrões de perspectivação conceitual de ações na L2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About