...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience >Neural Correlates of Concreteness in Semantic Categorization
【24h】

Neural Correlates of Concreteness in Semantic Categorization

机译:语义分类中具体性的神经相关

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

In some contexts, concrete words (CARROT) are recognized and remembered more readily than abstract words (TRUTH). This concreteness effect has historically been explained by two theories of semantic representation: dual-coding [Paivio, A. Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255-287, 1991] and context-availability [Schwanenflugel, P. J. Why are abstract concepts hard to understand? In P. J. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), The psychology of word meanings (pp. 223-250). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1991]. Past efforts to adjudicate between these theories using functional magnetic resonance imaging have produced mixed results. Using event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging, we re-examined this issue with a semantic categorization task that allowed for uniform semantic judgments of concrete and abstract words. The participants were 20 healthy adults. Functional analyses contrasted activation associated with concrete and ab- stract meanings of ambiguous and unambiguous words. Results showed that for both ambiguous and unambiguous words, abstract meanings were associated with more widespread cortical activation than concrete meanings in numerous regions associated with semantic processing, including temporal, parietal, and frontal cortices. These results are inconsistent with both dual-coding and context-availability theories, as these theories propose that the representations of abstract concepts are relatively impoverished. Our results suggest, instead, that semantic retrieval of abstract concepts involves a network of association areas. We argue that this finding is compatible with a theory of semantic representation such as Barsalou's [Barsalou, L. W. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660, 1999] perceptual symbol systems, whereby concrete and abstract concepts are represented by similar mechanisms but with differences in focal content.
机译:在某些情况下,比抽象词(TRUTH)更容易识别和记住具体词(CARROT)。历史上,这种具体性的影响已通过两种语义表示理论进行了解释:双重编码[Paivio,A.双重编码理论:回顾与现状。 《加拿大心理学杂志》,第45卷,第255-287页,1991年]和上下文可用性[Schwanenflugel,P. J.为什么抽象概念很难理解?在P. J. Schwanenflugel(Ed。)中,单词含义的心理学(pp。223-250)。新泽西州希尔斯代尔:厄尔鲍姆(Erlbaum),1991年]。过去使用功能磁共振成像在这些理论之间进行裁决的努力产生了不同的结果。使用事件相关的功能磁共振成像,我们通过语义分类任务重新检查了这个问题,该任务允许对具体和抽象单词进行统一的语义判断。参加者为20名健康成年人。功能分析将激活与歧义和明确词的具体和抽象含义相关联。结果表明,对于模棱两可的单词,在与语义处理相关的许多区域(包括颞叶,顶叶和额叶皮层皮质)中,抽象含义与更广泛的皮层激活相关,而不是具体含义。这些结果与双重编码理论和上下文可用性理论均不一致,因为这些理论提出抽象概念的表示相对贫乏。相反,我们的结果表明,抽象概念的语义检索涉及关联区域网络。我们认为,这一发现与语义表示理论(例如Barsalou的[Barsalou,L. W.感知符号系统])兼容。 [Behavioral&Brain Sciences,22,577-660,1999]感知符号系统,其中具体和抽象的概念由相似的机制表示,但焦点内容不同。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号