Abstract
There are two kinds of preferential representations. They are connected on the one hand to the degree of typicality of the instance in relation to the category, and on the other hand to the level of categorial abstraction. We consider them in their initial theoretical background which is the «natural categorization» one and, for categories of objects, it questions the classical Aristotelian conception. We bring out the fact that preferential representations can also, be traced in the fields of the relation and process categories, and that, according to the same logic, they’ve got to be taken into account when schemata are concerned. We go through a series of experiments which deal with the effects the preferential representations have while the information is being processed, especially in a developmental point of view. To finish with, we insist on the fact that these effects have to be considered systematically in the study of the acquisition of knowledge.
Résumé
Les représentations privilégiées sont de deux types. Elles sont liées au degré de typicalité de l’exemplaire par rapport à la catégorie d’une part, au niveau d’abstraction catégorielle d’autre part. Nous les envisageons dans leur cadre théorique initial, celui de la «catégorisation naturelle» qui, pour des catégories d’objets, remet en cause la conception aristotélicienne classique. Nous mettons en évidence que les représentations privilégiées peuvent être soulignées également dans les domaines des catégories de relations et de procès, et que, dans la même logique, il est légitime de les prendre en compte au niveau des schémas. Nous présentons une revue des expérimentations qui traitent des effets des représentations privilégiées au cours du traitement de l’information, tout particulièrement dans une perspective développementale. Nous soulignons enfin la nécessité de prendre en compte systématiquement ces effets dans l’acquisition de connaissances.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anglin, J. M. (1978). From reference to meaning.Child Development, 49, 969–976.
Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ah hoc categories.Memory and Cognition, 11, 211–227.
Barsalou, L. W., & Sewell, D. R. (1985). Contrasting the representation of scripts and categories.Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 646–655.
Berlin, B. (1978). Ethnobiological classification. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.),Cognition and Categorization (pp. 9–16). Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Berlin, B., & Kay, P. (1969),Basic color terms. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bideaud, J. (1981). Les expériences d’apprentissage de l’inclusion et la théorie opératoire.Psychologie Française, 24, 238–258.
Bjorklund D. F., & Thompson, B. E. (1983). Category typicality effects in children’s memory performance: qualitative and quantitative differences in the processing of category information.Journal of experimental child psychology, 35, 329, 344.
Bjorklund, D. F., Thompson, B. E., & Ornstein, P. A. (1983). Development trends in children’s typicality judgments,Behavior Research Methods and Instrumentation, 15, 350–356.
Blewitt, P. (1983). Dog versus collie: vocabulary in speech to young children.Development Psychology, 19, 602–609.
Blewitt, P., & Durkin, M. (1982). Age, typicality and task effects on categorization of objects.Perceptual and motor skills, 5, 435–455.
Bornstein, M. H. (1981). Two kinds of perceptual organization near the beginning of life. In W. A. Collins (Ed.),Aspects of the development of competence (pp. 39–91). Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown, R. (1974).A first language. Cambridge, Mas: Harvard University Press.
Carson, M. T., & Abrahamson, A. (1976). Some members are more equals than others: the effect of semantic typicality on class-inclusion performance.Child Development, 47 1186–1190.
Clark, E. (1973). What’s in a word? On the child’s acquisition of semantics in his first language. In T. E. Moore (Ed.),Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.
Coleman, L., & Kay, P. (1981). Prototype semantics: the english word lie.Language, 57, 26–44.
Collins, A.M., & Quillian, M. R. (1972). Experiments on semantic memory and language comprehension. In L. W. Gregg (Ed.),Cognition in Learning and Memory. New York: Wiley.
Cordier, F. (1981) Categorisation d’exemplaires et degré de typicalité: étude chez des enfants.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 1, 75–84.
Cordier, F. (1983a). Abstraction d’une information typique chez des enfants.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 3, 461–474.
Cordier, F. (1983b). Inclusion de classes. Existe t-il, un effet sémantique?L’Année Psychologique, 83, 491–503.
Cordier, F. (1985). Formal and locative categories. Are there typical instances?Psychologica Belgica, XXV-2, 115–125.
Cordier, F. (1986). La catégorisation naturelle: niveau de base et typicalité. Les approaches développementales.Revue Française de Pédagogie, 77, 61–70.
Cordier, F. (1987a). Collections, catégories et acquisition du lexique (à paraître dans une publication du CRDP de Dijon).
Cordier, F. (1987b). Catégorisation d’objets, de relations, de procès: effets de typicalité.Actes du colloque Cognitiva 87, organisé par le Cesta. Paris, pp. 135–140.
Cordier, F. (1987c). Analyse de la représentation typique de verbes de procès.Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 41, 490–500.
Cordier, F. (1987d). Etude développementale des propriétés des catégories sémantiques en fonction de leur typicalité et de leur niveau d’abstraction. Pre-print.
Cordier, F., & Dubois, D. (1981). Typicalité et représentation cognitive.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 1, 299–334.
Denhière, G. (1984).Il était une fois… Compréhension et Souvenir de récits. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.
Denhière, G. (1985). De la compréhension à la lecture.L’orientation scolaire et professionnelle, 14, 305–329.
Denhière, G., & Deschènes, A. J. (1985). Connaissances initiales et acquisition d’informations nouvelles à l’aide de textes. (Document Cepco n.o 39.)
Desclés, J. P. (1985). Représentation des connaissances. Archétypes cognitifs, schèmes conceptuels et schémas grammaticaux.Actes sémiotiques, 7, 1–51.
Desclés, J. P. (1986). Approximation et typicalité. A paraître dans les actes du colloque sur «l’à peu près», Urbino.
Dubois, D. (1986).La compréhension de phrases: représentations sémantiques et processus. Doctorat d’Etat, Université de Paris VIII. Non publiée.
Erreich, A., & Valian, V. (1979). Children’s internal organization of locative categories.Child Development, 50, 1071–1077.
Frederiksen, C. H. (1986). Cognitive modes and discourse analysis In C. R. Cooper & S. Greenbaum (Eds.),Studying Writing: Linguistic Approaches (pp. 227–268, vol. 1), Sage publications.
Hemenway, K. (1981).The role of perceived parts in categorization. Thèse, Stanford University. Non publiée.
Horton, M. S., & Markman, E. M. (1980). Developmental differences in the acquisition of basic and superordinate categories.Child Development, 51, 708–719.
Hudson, J., & Nelson, K. (1984). Play with language: overextensions as analogies.Journal of Child Language, 11, 337–346.
Hupp S. C., & Mervis, C. B. (1981). Development of generalized concepts by severely handicapped students.Journal of the association for the severely handicapped, 6, 14–21.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1955).De la logique de l’enfant à la logique de l’adolescent. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Kelly, M. H., Bock, J. K., & Keil, F. C. (1986). Prototypicality in a linguistic context: effects on sentence structure.Journal of memory and language, 25, 59–74.
Kuczaj, S. T. (1982). Young children’s overextensions of object words in comprehension, and/or production: support for a prototype theory of early object word meaning.FI, 3, 93–105.
Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Papers from the eight reginal meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago.
Lakoff, G. (1981). Categories and cognitive models. InLinguistics in the morning calm. Linguistic society of Koréa (Ed.), Hanshin: Séoul.
Langacker, R. (1983). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Pre-print. San Diego University.
Lasky, R. E. (1974). The ability of six-year-olds, eight-year-olds and adults to abstract visual pattern.Child Development, 45, 626–632.
Le Ny, J. F. (1979).La sémantique psychologique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Le Ny, J. F. (1987). Typicalité et psychologie cognitive. Intervention au colloque sur la typicalité. Université de Strasbourg.
Le Ny, J. F., & Denhière, G. (1982). Profile of CINNA: Construction of individualized texts.Text, 2, 193–210.
MacNamara, T. P. (1986).Names for things: a study of human learning. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Mandler J. M. (1979). Categorical and schematic organization in memory. In C. R. Puff (Ed.),Memory organization and structure. New York: Academic Press.
Mervis, C. B., & Crisafi, M. A. (1982). Order of acquisition of subordinate basic and superordinate level categories.Child Development, 53, 258–266.
Mervis, C. B., & Pani, J. R. (1980). Acquisition of basic object categories.Cognitive Psychology, 12, 496–522.
Palmer, S. E. (1978): Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (Eds.),Cognition and Categorization: Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Rifkin, A. (1985). Evidence for a basic level in event taxonomies.Memory and Cognition, 13, 538–556.
Rips, L. J., Shoben, E. J., & Smith, E. E. (1973). Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 1–20.
Rosch-Heider, E. (1971). «Focal» color areas and the development of color names.Developmental Psychology, 4, 447–455.
Rosch, E. (1975a). Cognitive reference points.Cognitive Psychology, 7, 532–547.
Rosch, E. (1975b). Cognitive representations of semantic categories.Journal of Experimental Psychologie: General, 104, 192–233.
Rosch, E. (1978). Human categorization. In W. Warren (Ed.),Studies in Cross-Cultural Psychology (pp. 1–49, vol. 1). London: Academic Press.,
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W., Johnson, D., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories,Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382, 439.
Rosch, E., Simpson, C., & Miller, R. C. (1976). Structural bases of typicality effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human perception and performance, 2, 491–502.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1980) Schemata: the building blocks of cognition. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce & W. Brewer (Eds.),Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
Saxby, L., & Anglin, J. M. (1983). Children’s sorting of objects from categories of differing, levels of generality.The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 143, 123–137.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977).Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawren Erlbaum Associates.
Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981).Categories and concepts Cambridge, Mas: Harvard University Press.
Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., & Rips, L. J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: a featural model for semantic decisions.Psychological Review, 81, 214–241.
Strauss, M. S. (1979). The abstraction of prototypical information by adults and 10-month-old infants.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human learning and memory, 5, 618–635.
Tiberghien, G. (1986). Intelligence, mémorie et artifice. In C. Bonnet, J. M. Hoc, & G. Tiberghien (Eds.),Psychologie, Intelligence Artificielle et Automatique, Liège: Mardaga.
Tversky, B., & Hemenway, K. (1983). Categories of environmental scenes.Cognitive Psychology, 15, 121–149.
Tversky, B., & Hemenway, K. (1984). Objects, parts and categories.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 169–193.
White, T. G. (1982). Naming, practices, typicality and underextension in child language.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 33, 324–346.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cordier, F. Preferred representations and knowledge acquisition. Eur J Psychol Educ 3, 123–135 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172650
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172650