Are abstract concepts structured via more concrete concepts
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•143 visualizações
The document discusses how abstract concepts may be structured through more concrete concepts like space and agency. It presents evidence that people think about time differently depending on whether they are primed with ideas related to being an active agent or a passive patient. Those primed with agency were more likely to interpret time ambiguous questions consistent with an "ego-moving" metaphor, while those primed with passivity interpreted them consistent with a "time-moving" metaphor. This suggests abstract representations of agency can influence how people conceptualize time.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais de John Dennis
Mais de John Dennis (14)
Último
Último (20)
Are abstract concepts structured via more concrete concepts
- 1. Are abstract concepts structured via more concrete concepts? John L. Dennis in collaboration with Arthur B. Markman Research supported by NIDA grant R21 DA015211-01A1 to A. B. Markman
- 2. Roadmap Concrete representations shape our thinking of abstract representations. Concrete domain of space shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time via a structured metaphor. Agency as a possible confound with this metaphor. Abstract representations of agency shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time.
- 3. Concrete representations shape our thinking of abstract representations. How do we represent the abstract concepts like? QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Love Justice Time
- 4. Metaphoric Representation View (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980) Abstract concepts are represented via a metaphor from more concrete concepts. GOOD IS UP; BAD IS DOWN I’m feeling up. I’m feeling down. My spirits rose. My spirits sank. Linguistic Evidence
- 5. Perceptual Symbol Systems (Barsalou, 1997 Actions like predicates and recursion are done by perception. Embodied Cognition (Clark, 2001; Prinz & Barsalou, 2000) Representations as context sensitive, embodied, and temporally based. Metaphoric Structuring View (Boroditsky, 2000) Metaphors provide relational structure for abstract concepts, e.g., the ego-moving and time-moving metaphors. Psychological Evidence
- 6. Ego & Time-Moving Metaphors Ego-moving metaphor We passed the deadline two days ago. past deadline future
- 7. Ego & Time-Moving Metaphors Ego-moving metaphor We passed the deadline two days ago. past deadline future
- 8. Ego & Time-Moving Metaphors Ego-moving metaphor We passed the deadline two days ago. past deadline future Time-moving metaphor The deadline passed [us] two days ago. past deadline future
- 9. Ego & Time-Moving Metaphors Ego-moving metaphor We passed the deadline two days ago. past deadline future Time-moving metaphor The deadline passed [us] two days ago. past deadline future
- 10. Roadmap Concrete representations shape our thinking of abstract representations. Concrete domain of space shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time via a structured metaphor.
- 11. Spatial Primes Metaphoric Structuring View QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Spatial Analog of Time-Moving Metaphor QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Spatial Analog of Ego-Moving Metaphor Boroditsky, 2000 Figure 3
- 12. Next Wednesday's meeting has been moved forward two days. What day is the meeting now that it has been rescheduled? Temporally Ambiguous Question Wednesday Wednesday Monday Friday Monday Friday
- 13. Next Wednesday's meeting has been moved forward two days. What day is the meeting now that it has been rescheduled? Temporally Ambiguous Question Wednesday Wednesday Monday Friday Monday Friday
- 14. Next Wednesday's meeting has been moved forward two days. What day is the meeting now that it has been rescheduled? Temporally Ambiguous Question Wednesday Wednesday Monday Friday Monday Friday
- 15. Metaphoric Structuring View Wednesday Monday Friday Monday Friday QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 16. Metaphoric Structuring View Wednesday Monday Friday Monday Friday QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 17. Metaphoric Structuring View Wednesday Monday Friday Wednesday Monday Friday QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture.
- 18. Roadmap Concrete representations shape our thinking of abstract representations. Concrete domain of space shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time via a structured metaphor. Agency as a possible confound with this metaphor. Abstract representations of agency shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time.
- 19. Ego-moving metaphor past future Relatively active Time-moving metaphor past future Relatively passive Agency as a possible confound with this metaphor.
- 20. QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Relatively active QuickTime™ and a TIFF (LZW) decompressor are needed to see this picture. Relatively passive Boroditsky, 2000 Figure 3 Spatial Analog of Ego-Moving Metaphor Spatial Analog of Time-Moving Metaphor Agency as a possible confound with this metaphor.
- 21. Roadmap Concrete representations shape our thinking of abstract representations. Concrete domain of space shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time via a structured metaphor. Agency as a possible confound with this metaphor. Abstract representations of agency shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time.
- 22. Agency Agency vs. Passivity Mary kissed Tom. Mary = agent, cause of action Tom = patient, recipient of action Interpersonal action verbs have an implicit causality (Fillmore, 1968)
- 23. Experiment Task 1 (prime) Unscramble either grammatical subject or grammatical object sentences using interpersonal action verbs. Mary I under kissed the bridge ‘Agency’ primes ‘Passivity’ primes Mary bridge me kissed the under Task 2 (test) Answer temporally ambiguous ‘next Wednesday’s meeting’ question. Dennis & Markman, in prep
- 24. Predictions Implicit representation of agency alters one’s thinking about time. ‘Agency’ primes will produce results consistent with the ego-moving metaphor. ‘Passivity’ primes will produce results consistent with the time- moving metaphor. Abstract representations of agency shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time. Dennis & Markman, in prep
- 25. Results 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 Control (No Prime) Agency ("I" Grammatical Subject) Passivity ("ME" Grammatical Object) Condition Proportion Selecting Friday Ego-Moving (Selecting Friday) Time-Moving (Selecting Monday)
- 26. Conclusions One’s implicit representation of agency altered one’s thinking about time. ‘Agency’ primes produced results consistent with the ego-moving metaphor. ‘Passivity’ primes produced results consistent with the time-moving metaphor. Abstract representations of agency shapes our thinking of the abstract domain of time. Dennis & Markman, in prep
- 27. Future Directions One’s relative implicit agency cause one to systematically disambiguate a spatially ambiguous scene. One’s relative implicit agency cause one to systematically disambiguate an agency ambiguous scene. One’s implicit representation of approach/avoidance motivations changes how one thinks about time. Dennis & Markman, in prep
- 28. Thanks Matt McGlone, Serge Block, Matt Jones, Kyungil Kim, Lisa Narvaez, Tatjiana Feinstein, Jeff Laux, Micah and Eric Taylor: For helpful discussions Leland Lockart, Andrew Friedman, Patrick Brown, Brian Gurbach, Jason Lopez and Sonya Crocker: For their heroic data collection efforts Leora Orent: for managing the Similarity and Cognition Lab Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science: for inviting Lera Boroditsky to give a lecture 3 years ago on this topic. Nevin Pecorelli: for encouraging my research on time despite my persistent tardiness.
- 29. experiment 2 (pilot) negative valence agent primes task 1 (prime) unscramble grammatical subject sentences using solely negative valence interpersonal action verbs i.e., Mary under bridge badgered the I. task 2 (test) answer temporally ambiguous ‘next wednesday’s meeting’ question
- 30. 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 i pos&neg iav i neg iav control condition % chosen Time-Moving (Mon) Ego-Moving (Fri) experiment 2 results significant trend difference between the neg & pos agent vs. neg agent
- 31. Which of these widgets is ahead? (please circle one) COND c ontr olm e conditionI condition C o u n t 1 8 1 6 1 4 1 2 1 0 8 6 4 2 TYPE m onday fr iday Spatially ambiguous
- 33. kyak 03.31.05 n=80 iv; n=31 cont -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 kp1 kp2 kp3 kp4 kp5 kp6 kp7 kp8 kp9 kp10 kp11 kp12 kp13 photos diff from control i condition me condition Log. (i condition) Log. (me condition) <0=passive >0=active
Notas do Editor
- It is relatively easy for us to see the commonalities for concrete concepts like: DOG or CHAIR or KNIFE The problem with abstract concepts is that they differ so widely across situations. The question is: How are we able to see the similarity across situations.. So, one argument is that we represent abstract concepts via specific, particular, and experiential instances. One area of research where this argument has been fleshed out quite considerably is linguistics …
- With the metaphoric representation view, Lakoff and Johnson have marshaled significant linguistic evidence to demonstrate that those concepts that do not emerge directly from our physical experience involve metaphoric mappings from a concrete domain in order to be understood. For this metaphor - good is up, bad is down. They argue that things like drooping posture are typically associated with sadness, whereas erect posture is associated with a positive emotional state. And that we use this physical experience to comprehend what the abstract concepts of good and bad mean.
- PSS Mechanisms that are typically associated with abstract thought are there in perception, With EC, you have an argument that there is a range for a given representation and where you are and what you are doing alters those representations systematically. With MSV, Boroditsky is providing the psychological evidence for the metaphoric representation view of Lakoff and Johnson. To do this, Boroditsky focuses in one two domains - the abstract domain of time and the concrete domain of space - via the ego-moving and time moving-metphors. But before, I continue, let me unpack what I mean by the ego-moving and time-moving metaphors.
- Two dominant spatial metaphors for expressing the sequence of events over time (Clark, 1973) With the ego-moving metaphor events, like deadlines, are stationary and the person moves towards and eventually …
- Passes the deadline.
- Whereas for the time-moving metaphor the individual is stationary and events, like deadlines, are moving and eventually …
- The deadline moves past the stationary individual. So, to review, for the ego -moving metaphor, time is conceptualized as a space where events are stationary objects and the person moves from the past to the future. While for the time-moving metaphor events are objects in space that are moving toward and past the stationary individual.
- So, we have briefly discussed the arguments for how concrete, experiential concepts shape our thinking of more abstract representations, now I would like to dig deeper into the Boroditsky’s metaphoric structuring view.
- Boroditsky argues that the abstract domain of time is structured via a metaphor to the concrete domain of space. To argue this point, Boroditsky first created spatial analogs to the EM and TM metaphors. Describe each scenario. Subject’s task is to state whether the statements describing the scenarios are true, then following a number of trials subjects are asked a temporally ambiguous question Before I continue with Boroditsky’s research let me unpack what I mean by the temporally ambiguous question.
- In the English language the word forward is ambiguous in terms of implied directionality of movement, such that it could mean that the meeting has been moved further in the future to Friday or closer to Monday. Ok, but what does this question have to do with the ego-moving and the time-moving metaphors? Well, if you are moving through time towards the future, as you are with the ego-moving metaphor, then for the meeting to be moved forward - that would mean that the meeting would have to be rescheduled
- to Friday. Now, for the time moving metaphor, you are stationary and in order for the meeting to be movded forward - that would mean that the meeting would have to be rescheduled …
- to Monday. OK. Now, that we understand how the temporally ambiguous question corresponds with the ego-moving and the time moving metaphor, let’s return to boroditsky’s research and see how time is understood via a metaphor with space.
- OK, now in order for Boroditsky to argue that time is understood via a structured metaphor to space, she demonstrated that when subjects were primed with the spatial analogs of the ego-moving and time-moving metaphors that I previously discussed, then their thinking about time would change sytematically and in the same direction as previously described for the ego-moving and time-moving metaphors. So, on the top left, when subjects were primed, I.e., asked to answer a number of true/false questions about the statements below the scenarios, like, “the flower is in front of me” - how would the subject answer the temporally ambiguous question following this prime?
- Well they systematically answered Friday - consistent with the ego-moving metaphor. And what would happen when subjects were primed with the spatial analog of the time-moving metaphor on the bottom left, and then asked the temporally ambiguous question?
- Well they systematically answered Monday - consistent with the ego-moving metaphor. So, to review, Boroditsky’s metaphoric structuring view accurately predicted that when subjects were primed with spatial scenarios that were analogs of the ego-moving and time-moving metaphor, they would systematically disambiguate the the temporally ambiguous question consistent with the ego-moving and time-moving metaphors. When subjects were primed with the analogs for the ego-moving metaphor, subjects would state that the meeting was rescheduled to Friday, whereas subjects who were primed with the analogs for the time-moving metaphor, subjects would state that the meeting was rescheduled to Monday - PAUSE, PAUSE, PAUSE!!!!
- We have finished describing boroditsky’s metaphoric structuring view and now I would like to spend some time describing a possible confound with this research.
- Notice how with this schema of the ego-moving metaphor, up top, that the observer is actively moving forward to the future. For example, we passed the deadline two days ago. The deadline is relatively passive and the observer is actively moving past the deadline. While for the time-moving metaphor the observer is stationary and it is the events that are actively moving through time. For example, the deadline passed two days ago. The observer is relatively passive and the deadline is relatively active as it moves past the observer.
- Notice again, how with these schemas used by Boroditsky, that when we examine the spatial analog of the ego-moving metaphor through the lense of agency, we see that the observer is actively moving through space towards the stationary, passive, drum and the flower pot. While for the spatial analog of the time-moving metaphor, the hat box and the kleenex are placed on a conveyor belt and are actively moving towards the seated, stationary and passive individual. PAUSE!!
- We have just finished talking about the possible confound with metaphoric structuring view and now we move on to our experiment that demonstrates that one’s thinking about the abstract domain of time is influenced by one’s abstract representation of agency. And first let me talk to you about what I mean by agency for our experiments.
- Fillmore observed that interpersonal action verbs, like ‘kissed’, have an implicit causality that helps us formulate inferences about causes of action. Mary is the agent and is typically interpreted as the cause of the action, while Tom is the patient and is typically interpreted as the recipient of the action. Mary, the agent, is therefore thought of as relatively active while Tom, the patient, is thought of as relatively passive. Now that I have described what I mean by agency for our experiment, let me now explain our experiment.
- The first task of the subject is to unscramble a series of sentences where they are placed in either the grammatical subject or the grammatical object of the sentence. On the left we have what we are calling the agency primes. Here subjects are given a series of words that when they are unscrambled the sentence would read - I kissed Mary under the bridge or Under the bridge I kissed Mary. On the right we have what we are calling the passivity primes. When the words are unscrambled, the sentence would read - Mary kissed me under the bridge or Under the bridge, Mary kissed me. Following this task subjects are asked the temporally ambiguous next wednesdays meeting question. Now that I have explained the experiment - let’s move on to the predictions.
- First, we predicted that one’s implicit representation of agency alters how one thinks about time Furthermore, we predicted that the ‘agency’ primes will induce subjects to answer the temporally ambiguous ‘next Wednesday’s meeting’ question consistent with the ego-moving metaphor. Finally, we predicted that the ‘passivity’ primes will induce subjects to answer the ambiguous question consistent with the time-moving metaphor. Now let’s look at the results of the experiment.
- First, on the x axis we have the conditions and on the y axis we have the proportion selecting Friday to the temporally ambiguous question. As the legend indicates the brown represents the selection of Friday for the temporally ambiguous question and the orange represents the selection of Monday, and the dotted line represents chance. As we can see when subjects were asked to answer the temporally ambiguous question without a prime answered equally Monday and Friday. Whereas subjects who were given what we are calling the ‘agency’ primes were more likely to answer Friday for the temporally ambiguous question. Finally, those subjects who were given what we are calling the ‘passivity’ primes were more likely to answer Monday. PAUSE!! So, …
- As predicted, one’s implicit representation of agency alters the way that one thinks about time. Furthermore, we accurately predicted that the ‘agency’ primes would induce subjects to answer the temporally ambiguous ‘next Wednesday’s meeting’ question consistent with the ego-moving metaphor. Finally, we accurately predicted that the ‘passivity’ primes would induce subjects to answer the ambiguous question consistent with the time-moving metaphor.
- The first two experiments can be thought of as turning the argument that our abstract representations are structured via more concrete representations on its head. Here we are arguing that abstract representations alter how we perceive concrete representations. Ascertain if one’s thinking about a concrete spatially ambiguous scenario is influenced by one’s implicit representations of agency. Examine if one’s thinking about concrete ambiguous agency scenes is influenced by the temporal metaphors as well as one’s implicit representations of agency. Determine if one’s implicit representation of approach/avoidance motivations changes how one thinks about time.