Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39715230›Full record

ArticleCognitive science2024

A Linguistic-Sensorimotor Model of the Basic-Level Advantage in Category Verification.

Cai Wingfield, Rens van Hoef, Louise Connell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Cai WingfieldDepartment of Psychology, Lancaster University.ORCID 0000-0002-0254-199X
Rens van HoefDepartment of Psychology, Lancaster University.ORCID 0000-0003-1355-1541
Louise ConnellDepartment of Psychology, Maynooth University.ORCID 0000-0002-5291-5267

Funding

Horizon 2020 Framework Programme 682848
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People are generally more accurate at categorizing objects at the basic level (e.g., dog) than at more general, superordinate categories (e.g., animal). Recent research has suggested that this basic-level advantage emerges from the linguistic-distributional and sensorimotor relationship between a category concept and object concept, but the proposed mechanisms have not been subject to a formal computational test. In this paper, we present a computational model of category verification that allows linguistic distributional information and sensorimotor experience to interact in a grounded implementation of a full-size adult conceptual system. In simulations across multiple datasets, we demonstrate that the model performs the task of category verification at a level comparable to human participants, and-critically-that its operation naturally gives rise to the basic-level-advantage phenomenon. That is, concepts are easier to categorize when there is a high degree of overlap in sensorimotor experience and/or linguistic distributional knowledge between category and member concepts, and the basic-level advantage emerges as an overall behavioral artifact of this linguistic and sensorimotor overlap. Findings support the linguistic-sensorimotor preparation account of the basic-level advantage and, more broadly, linguistic-sensorimotor theories of the conceptual system.

Indexed as

Concept FormationLinguisticsHumansBasic levelCategoriesConceptsLinguistic distributionalSensorimotor

Identifiers

PMID39715230
PMCPMC11666073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.