Folstein Jonathan R, Dieciuc Michael A
Department of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, United States.
Front Psychol. 2019 May 31;10:1265. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01265. eCollection 2019.
Typicality effects are among the most well-studied phenomena in the study of concepts. The classical notion of typicality is that typical concepts share many features with category co-members and few features with members of contrast categories. However, this notion was challenged by evidence that typicality is highly context dependent and not always dependent on central tendency. Dieciuc and Folstein (2019) argued that there is strong evidence for both views and that the two types of typicality effects might depend on different mechanisms. A recent theoretical framework, the controlled semantic cognition framework (Lamdon Ralph et al., 2017) strongly emphasizes the classical view, but includes mechanisms that could potentially account for both kinds of typicality. In contrast, the situated cognition framework (Barsalou, 2009b) articulates the context-dependent view. Here, we review evidence from cognitive neuroscience supporting the two frameworks. We also briefly evaluate the ability of computational models associated with the CSC to account for phenomena supporting SitCog (Rogers and McClelland, 2004). Many predictions of both frameworks are borne out by recent cognitive neuroscience evidence. While the CSC framework can at least potentially account for many of the typicality phenomena reviewed, challenges remain, especially with regard to categories.
典型性效应是概念研究中研究最为充分的现象之一。典型性的经典概念是，典型概念与类别中的其他成员共享许多特征，而与对比类别中的成员共享很少的特征。然而，有证据表明典型性高度依赖于上下文，并不总是依赖于集中趋势，这一概念受到了挑战。迪丘克和福尔斯泰因（2019年）认为，两种观点都有强有力的证据，而且这两种典型性效应可能依赖于不同的机制。最近的一个理论框架，即受控语义认知框架（兰登·拉尔夫等人，2017年）强烈强调经典观点，但也包括了可能解释两种典型性的机制。相比之下，情境认知框架（巴萨洛，2009年b）阐述了依赖于上下文的观点。在这里，我们回顾了来自认知神经科学的支持这两个框架的证据。我们还简要评估了与受控语义认知相关的计算模型解释支持情境认知现象的能力（罗杰斯和麦克莱兰，2004年）。最近的认知神经科学证据证实了这两个框架的许多预测。虽然受控语义认知框架至少有可能解释所回顾的许多典型性现象，但挑战仍然存在，尤其是在类别方面。
