Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26927850›Full record

ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2016

Using a Topological Model in Psychology: Developing Sense and Choice Categories.

Jens Mammen

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. On the Theorem of Correspondence.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2017
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jens MammenNiels Bohr professorship Centre for Cultural Psychology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. jensmammen@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A duality of sense categories and choice categories is introduced to map two distinct but co-operating ways in which we as humans are relating actively to the world. We are sensing similarities and differences in our world of objects and persons, but we are also as bodies moving around in this world encountering, selecting, and attaching to objects beyond our sensory interactions and in this way also relating to the individual objects' history. This duality is necessary if we shall understand man as relating to the historical depth of our natural and cultural world, and to understand our cognitions and affections. Our personal affections and attachments, as well as our shared cultural values are centered around objects and persons chosen as reference points and landmarks in our lives, uniting and separating, not to be understood only in terms of sensory selections. The ambition is to bridge the gap between psychology as part of Naturwissenschaft and of Geisteswissenschaft, and at the same time establish a common frame for understanding cognition and affection, and our practical and cultural life (Mammen and Mironenko 2015). The duality of sense and choice categories can be described formally using concepts from modern mathematics, primarily topology, surmounting the reductions rooted in the mechanistic concepts from Renaissance science and mathematics. The formal description is based on 11 short and simple axioms held in ordinary language and visualized with instructive figures. The axioms are bridging psychology and mathematics and not only enriching psychology but also opening for a new interpretation of parts of the foundation of mathematics and logic.

Indexed as

LogicMathematicsCognitionHumansLanguageScienceAffection and attachmentAristotleGerman PhilosophyMathematics, Formal Logic, Theory of Sets, Topology, Decidability, Axiomatic method, Axiom of ChoiceNaturwissenschaft vs. GeisteswissenschaftSense categories and choice categoriesStandards and reference points

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.