Public Categorization--论文代写范文精选

此外,这些临时的习惯可能会影响不同对象，再说,只是学习类别可以增强个人的推断能力，对于范畴的意义活动尽管相当复杂。下面的essay代写范文进行详述。

Abstract 
Referential communication serves as a form of externalized or “public” cognition (cf., Wittgenstein, 2001 [1958]), including “public” processes of categorization (see Russell, 1905; Brown, 1958; Grice, 1975; Cruse, 1977; Barr & Kronmüller, 2006 for various formulations of the conceptual function of reference). In the scenario, Alpha performs three such “public” categorizations: “aromatics” are a category of vegetables— onions, carrots, celery, et al.—used to flavor a dish, while “tagine” and “dutch oven” are subcategories of braisers—shallow, tightly-lidded pots used for slowly cooking a dish in its own condensation. By using a particular reference at a particular level of reference, communicating actors direct each other's attention (Kronmüller & Barr, 2007; Metzing & Brennan, 2003) to those features that allow each of them to differentiate the target referent from other possible referents (E.V. Clark, 1987; Mervis & Crisafi, 1982; Murphy & Brownell, 1985). 

Alpha instructs Beta to “heat up the tagine” (as opposed to “heat up the pot” or “heat up the braiser”) in order to help Beta differentiate the target cookware from the stock pots, roasting pans, and skillets in the cookware cabinet. Beta understands that a tagine is kind of braiser, but needs Alpha to direct his attention to the tagine’s differentiating features: ceramic vs. cast iron, conical lid vs. flat lid. Further, the use of a particular reference at a particular level of reference can direct joint attention to those features that allow each actor to infer the referent's significance to the activity (Brown, 3 1958; Corter & Gluck, 1992). The tagine originates from Morocco; so, Beta infers from that feature that Alpha has proposed that they prepare a Moroccan dish and confirms that joint intention by asking if he should boil water for couscous. Beta’s confirmatory question completes the “public” categorization of the tagine. The successful use of a particular reference at a particular level of reference should elicit an action that confirms the joint construal of both the target and its significance to the activity (Austin, 1976; Krauss & Weinheimer, 1966; Wilkes-Gibbs & Clark, 1992; Clark & Schaefer, 1989).

Shareability 
Cooking is a recurring, often institutionalized, coordination problem; therefore Alpha and Beta can rely heavily on conventions of referential communication—a repertoire of mutually-known, mutually-salient, and mutually-expected associations between reference and concept. Adherence to referential conventions can minimize the cognitive effort of directing joint attention, confirming joint construal, and executing joint intentions (Clark, 1996, Lewis, 1969). In this way, referential conventions convey conceptual information in a highly shareable form (cf., Freyd, 1983). 

Nevertheless, when faced with a new or unfamiliar activity, communicating actors often rely on ad hoc referential conventions (Garrod & Anderson, 1987; Brennan & Clark, 1996; et al.). Imagine Alpha and Beta repairing the electric ignitor on their stove; unfamiliar with the conventional names for various circuit parts, Beta points out, “that mini-bulb has burned out,” referring to a glass cartridge fuse. Such ad hoc conventions also reduce the cognitive effort of directing joint attention (Clark Schreuder, & Buttrick, 1983; Clark, 1972; Clark & Marshall, 1981), confirming joint construal (Wilkes-Gibbs & Clark, 1992; 4 Isaacs & Clark, 1987; Clark & Krych, 2004), and executing joint intentions (Clark & Lucy, 1975; Francik & Clark, 1985). The use of “mini-bulb” directs Alpha’s attention to a small glass object, containing a fine metal element. Alpha responds, “yeah, the filament has melted,” confirming his joint construal of “mini-bulb.” Moreover, these ad hoc conventions may affect how each actor later sorts conventionally named objects (Markman & Makin, 1998) and how each actor later judges the similarity and/or typicality of objects to a conventionally named category (Malt & Sloman, 2004). 

For example, one might expect Alpha or Beta to search for glass cartridge fuses in the lighting aisle of the hardware store rather than the circuitry aisle. Nevertheless, ad hoc referential conventions can vary in shareability. The minibulb category ultimately fails. It does not enable either Alpha or Beta to infer the functional significance of the fuse—a device for protecting circuits from the power surges that today burned a fuse and tomorrow might burn their building. For Alpha and Beta this failure will not persist; the hardware clerk will likely provide the necessary knowledge. In an entirely novel activity, communicating actors lack both prior knowledge and access to third-party experts. They must invent a referential lexicon for the objects, actions, and events in the activity environment as they discover the differentiating and significant features of those objects, actions, and events. Under such conditions, shareability may vary with more basic factors, such as feature structure.

Structural Constraints 
When engaged in private categorization—category learning during individual activity—human beings tend to learn simple relationships between features and their 5 significance more easily than complex relationships (cf., Feldman, 2003b). Imagine Bonita, a bee researcher, trying to diagnose colony collapse. She easily diagnoses parasite infestation, based on the presence or absence of mites; diagnosing vanishing bee syndrome, with its varying constellation of symptoms and uncertain causes, requires more effort and yields tentative results. 

Then again, simply labeling a privately learned category can enhance an individual’s ability to infer the category’s significance to the activity despite fairly complex, even contradictory, featural information (Yamauchi & Markman, 2000). Even a tentative diagnosis of a “syndrome” should prompt Bonita to suspect factors that cause general disruptions in the immune systems of the bees. What happens, though, when Bonita invites Belle, a designer of agent-based models, to collaborate on a simulation of colony collapse; will their conversation bog down in the complexities of vanishing bee syndrome, or will their emerging convention of referential labels enhance their joint reasoning? How structural complexity affects the shareability of ad hoc conventions remains uncertain.

Purpose 
With the present study, I investigated the interaction of referential communication and the structure of perceptual features on the joint processes of inventing a referential lexicon for novel objects and discovering the functional significance of those objects during an indirect category learning activity. To that end, participants worked either 6 individually or as cooperative1 dyads to learn four combinations of orthogonal functional features—nutritive vs. not nutritive and destructive vs. not destructive—that defined four categories of fictional extra-terrestrial creatures. These categories were not specifically identified or labeled; rather, participants had to infer them indirectly as they predicted the functions. 

Also, these functionally defined categories exhibited a complex perceptual structure: a unidimensional (simple) rule predicted one function, while a family resemblance (complex) sub-structure predicted the other function. This function-learning task yielded function prediction data. In addition to the main function-learning task, each learner worked individually to sort the creatures (pre- and post-function learning) and to predict their functions in an individual function prediction posttest that also yielded selective attention data. Together, the prediction data, sort data, and selective attention data demonstrated the overall affects of referential communication on the extra-linguistic aspects of concept learning and the differing affects of communication on the learning of simple versus complex relationships between perceptual and latent features.（essay代写)

51Due网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文著作权归51Due所有；未经51Due官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯著作权现象，51Due保留一切法律追诉权。
更多essay代写范文欢迎访问我们主页 www.51due.com 当然有essay代写需求可以和我们24小时在线客服 QQ:800020041 联系交流。-X（essay代写)