认知心理学一般知识组织

1、1张亚旭nThe storage, integration, and organization of information in memorynOrganized informationnPart of a system or network of structured information3Where Are They and How Are They Organized?n动物n水果n蔬菜n人造物体n6Semantic Feature-Comparison ModelnSmith, Shoben, & Rips, 1974nConcepts are represented in

2、 memory as a set of semantic featuresnDefining features (essential components)nCharacteristic featuresn句子核证 (sentence verification)n狗是一种动物。n蛇是一种动物。7WZWn真够呛，有知识的人这样的东西早就用上了。往上一点，往下一点。（水里的还是天上飞的）天上飞的。（是鸟吗）不是。（是坦克吗）很可能。（是军舰吗）不象，这是往上推的那个8LWZn锄锄树用的n下雨使的那个，灯罩，雨罩吧9Network ModelnKnowledge is represented in

3、memory as independent units connected in a network10Network Model:Spreading Activation Theory, Collins & Loftus, 1975n节点(nodes)与联结(links)11Network Model:ACT (Adaptive Control of Thought, Anderson, 1976, 1983, 1985)nPropositional networksnSusan gave a white cat to Maria, who is the president of t

4、he club.nSusan gave a cat to Maria.nThe cat was white.nMaria is the president of the club.n每个命题可以用一个节点来表征，命题网络则代表了各个命题之间的重要关系。命题中的每一个概念，也都可以用一个网络来表征12原型途径Prototype Approach, Rosch, 1973nThe robbers had many weapons.nThe robbers had many guns.nThe robbers had many bricks.13Cognitive Neuroscience Mode

5、lnKnowledge is represented in the organization of neural networksnPDP (Parallel Distributed Network)nKnowledge is in the connections between unitsnThe patterns (objects) themselves are not stored; what is stored is the connection strength between units, which allows these patterns to be recreated15T

6、he Organization of Knowledge: Revealed by Semantic Memory Disorders1920范畴特异的语义损伤Category-Specific Semantic ImpairmentsnWarrington & Shallice, 1984n4名曾患单纯疱疹性脑炎的病人n同无生命物体相比，病人产生/理解有生命物体名称，更加困难n病人JBR虽然只能识别或命名48个有生命物体中的2个，但能正确地描述和命名48个无生命物体中的45个Warrington, E.K., & Shallice, T. (1984). Category s

7、pecific semantic impairment. Brain, 107, 829-854Mahon & Caramazza, 2009Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2009). Concepts and categories: A cognitive neuro-psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 27-5122n绝大多数发表的个案，有生命物体损伤更为严重（Capitani et al., 2003）n动物、水果、蔬菜、人造物体Capitani, E.,

8、Laiacona, M., Mahon, B.Z., & Caramazza, A. (2003). What are the facts of semantic category-specific deficits? A critical review of the clinical evidence. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20 (3/4/5/6), 213261Caramazza, A., & Mahon, B. Z. (2003). The organization of conceptual knowledge: the evidenc

9、e from category-specific semantic deficits. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(8), 354-36123混淆因素的结果？n名称频率n项目熟悉度n视觉复杂度n可想象力24至少不能完全归于混淆因素n偶尔的个案，相对于有生命物体来说，在无生命的或人造的物体上，表现出更大的困难n使用名称频率、熟悉度、视觉复杂度和可想象力等方面严格匹配的刺激，仍然发现范畴特异性损伤现象n回归分析，发现有无生命这一语义范畴变量，影响病人的任务成绩25Domain-specific hypothesis(Caramazza & Shelton

10、, 1998)n认为人脑中语义知识按分类学范畴（如有无生命）来组织n它假设，生物进化使得人类发展了从知觉和概念两方面，区分有无生命物种的特殊机制，从而导致人脑中这些知识按范畴来组织n动物、水果、蔬菜、人造物体n因为不同范畴的知识存储在大脑的不同区域，所以，特定脑区的损伤，将造成存储在该脑区的特定范畴的知识，出现选择性的缺陷Caramazza, A., & Shelton, J.R. (1998). Domain specific knowledge systems in the brain: the animate-inanimate distinction. Journal of C

11、ognitive Neuroscience, 10, 1-34.26领域特异性假设：神经心理学证据n大多数有生命物体知识选择性受损病人，左侧颞叶受损，或者在单纯疱疹性脑炎康复之后，右侧颞叶受损。而人造物体知识选择性受损病人，典型的受损部位是额顶区n不过，也有一些有生命物体知识选择性受损病人，额叶和顶叶下部受损，或者在经历脑外伤之后大脑广泛受损。此外，也有一些人造物体知识选择性受损病人，颞叶受损n总的看，有生命范畴的特异性损伤，通常同颞叶受损相联系，有时和额叶、顶叶相联系。而无生命范畴的特异性损伤，通常同颞、顶和背侧额叶的损伤相联系27领域特异性假设：脑成像证据28领域特异性假设：评价n对范畴特

12、异性损伤现象的解释，简捷明了n难以解释广泛性脑损伤病人所表现出的范畴特异性损伤n经历脑外伤之后大脑广泛受损，能够导致有生命物体知识的范畴特异性损伤n阿尔兹海默病 (Alzheimers Disease) 病人也能产生范畴特异性损伤，而这类病人的病变通常是弥散性的，并不局限于某个特定的脑区29Visual similarity & crowding of visual representationsHumphreys & Forde, 2001; Tranel, Logan, Frank, & Damasio, 1997n不是用有无生命这样的二分法来解释范畴特异性损伤，而

13、是强调视觉信息与有生命物体识别之间的关系n有/ 无生命物体之间，在把范畴的一个成员同另一个成员区分开，所要求的视觉加工的程度和细节上，有重要区别30n同人造物体相比，动物、水果和蔬菜，有着惊人的范畴内的结构相似性。因此，这些物体的识别，对前语义的结构描述系统要求较高n较高的范畴内的结构相似性，容易造成“视觉拥挤”，使得不同成员之间难以区分n这种观点实际上隐含地认为，没必要假设两个语义记忆系统，单一的语义记忆系统，完全能够解释脑损伤病人身上所出现的范畴特异性损伤31特征途径n第三种观点可称之为特征途径（attribute approach）n迄今为止，该理论已经出现了n简单的通道特异性假设 n相

14、互作用的通道特异性假设 n特征相关32Domain-specific hypothesis or sensory/functional theory (Warrington & McCarthy 1983, 1987; Warrington & Shallice 1984)n语义知识按照不同的感觉运动通道（如视觉或知觉语义知识、功能或联想语义知识）来组织n特定语义特征对知识获得和描述来说，具有不同的权重Warrington EK, McCarthy RA. 1983. Category specific access dysphasia. Brain 106:85978Warr

15、ington EK, McCarthy RA. 1987. Categories of knowledge: further fractionations and an attempted integration. Brain 110:127396Warrington EK, Shallice T. 1984. Category specific semantic impairment. Brain 107:8295433n对有生命物体来说，同功能或联想特征（做什么用、在哪里用、什么时候用）相比，知觉特征（一个物体看起来、听起来或感觉起来怎么样）有更大的权重n因此，在有生命物体范畴内，概念（如

16、“老虎”和“豹子”）的区分和加工更多地依赖于它们的知觉特征34n对人造物体来说，同知觉特征相比，功能特征有更大的权重n因此，在人造物体范畴内，概念的区分和加工更多地依赖于它们的功能特征35n语义记忆由两个子系统构成，即知觉特征子系统和功能特征子系统n有生命物体或人造物体两个不同范畴的特异性损伤，分别是由知觉和功能这样两个子系统分别受损造成的n这种途径既能解释大多数有生命物体范畴出现特异性损伤的个案，也能解释偶尔发现的无生命物体范畴选择性受损的个案36Evidence for modality-specific hypothesisn计算机模拟 (Farah & McClelland,

17、1991)n选择性损伤知觉或功能特征，确实能够产生范畴特异性损伤n一些有生命物体范畴出现特异性损伤的病人，同功能特征任务相比，完成知觉特征任务，更为困难。这些病人甚至在辨别人造物体（如不同的轿车）时也有困难，只要这些物体视觉上容易混淆Farah M, & McClelland J. 1991. A computational model of semantic memory impairment: modality specificity and emergent category specificity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Gen

18、eral, 120, 339-35737Martin et al., 1995nfMRI研究，要求被试想象一个物体的知觉属性或功能属性n结果发现，知觉条件使腹侧颞叶活动增强，而功能条件使左侧颞叶中后部活动增强Evidence against the modality-specific hypothesis(Mahon & Caramazza, 2009)differential impairments for visual/perceptual knowledgecan be associated with (if anything) a disproportionate impair

19、ment for nonliving things compared toliving thingsEvidence against the modality-specific hypothesis(Mahon & Caramazza, 2009)40简单的通道特异性假设：评价n同按分类学范畴组织知识相比，用通道特异性的语义表征来组织知识，似乎更经济n不能说明范畴特异性知识损伤中的一种现象，即对有生命物体来说，知觉和非知觉的知识都受到损伤41相互作用的通道特异性假设n这种观点在承认知识按照不同的感觉运动通道组织的同时，认为知识表征是分布式的和相互作用的n它假设，客体表征的每一个部分都为

20、另一个部分提供额外的激活。因此，一个部分的受损可能影响激活其它部分的能力n对于有一个优势表征通道的知识范畴来说，任何一个通道信息的提取，都可能要求优势通道信息的提取42相互作用的通道特异性假设：脑成像证据nThompson-Schill et al., 1999nfMRI 技术n有无生命两种物体的信息提取与左侧梭状回的激活n左侧梭状回参与视觉信息提取过程，甚至是缺乏外显视觉刺激时，也是如此n产生颜色词和心理表象可激活该脑区n按照相互作用的通道特异性假设，即使是在提取有生命物体的非视觉信息时，也会出现左侧梭状回的活动Thompson-Schill SL, Aguirre GK, DEsposit

21、o M, Farah MJ. 1999. A neural basis for category and modality specificity of semantic knowledge. Neuropsychologia, 37, 671-67643Mummery et al., 1998nPETn使用了三种相似性判断任务n就物体的典型颜色（视觉特征）进行判断n就物体所处的典型空间位置（联想特征）进行判断n就词中所包含的音节的数目进行判断n实验材料n有生命物体、人造物体44结果n两种范畴（即有无生命）和两种特征（即知觉特征和联想特征），尽管都激活了左半球语义系统，但仍然引起了某些区别性的

22、激活，尤其是不同类型的特征n典型空间位置判断条件下，左侧颞枕顶交界显示出增强的活动n颜色判断激活了左侧靠前的颞皮层中部和尾状核n有生命与无生命两种范畴之间，所激活的脑区差异较小n在词所激活的分布式概念系统中，神经上的区别主要与特征类型有关45Different types of features are differentially correlated across different semantic categoriesn有无生命两种物体之间，视觉与功能/联想两种特征之间的关系不同n有生命物体视觉和功能/联想特征之间没什么联系n而无生命物体则不然n这种观点能够解释为什么有生命物体更容易选

23、择性地受损46Tyler & Moss, 2001nLiving things have more shared features, whereas nonliving things have more distinctive featuresnThe shared features of living things are highly correlated (has eyes/can see), whereas for nonliving things, distinctive features are highly correlated (used for spearing/ha

24、s tines)Tyler LK, Moss HE. 2001. Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge. Trends in Cognitive Science, 5, 244-25247Tyler LK, Moss HE. 2001. Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge. Trends in Cognitive Science, 5, 244-25248Tyler & Moss, 2001nIf distinctive features are

25、 critical for identification, and if greater correlation confers resilience to damage, then an interaction between the severity of overall impairment and the direction of category-specific semantic deficit is predictednMild levels of impairments should produce disproportionate impairments for living

26、 things compared to nonliving thingsnAt more severe levels of impairments, the distinctive features of nonliving things will be lost and a disproportionate impairment for this category will be observedTyler LK, Moss HE. 2001. Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge. Trends in Cognitive

27、 Science, 5, 244-25249But an opposite prediction can also be predicted.n有生命物体内部，特征与特征之间具有很强的相关。例如，有毛皮的也有胡须n对于有生命物体来说，少量的损伤（少量联结的丢失），通常不会影响一个物体的识别，因为特征之间很强的相关会起到一种保护的作用。然而，足够量的损伤，将导致一些特征的丢失，这会引起有生命物体范畴内许多成员Devlin J, Gonnerman L, Andersen E, Seidenberg M. 1998. Category-specific semantic deficits in f

28、ocal and widespread brain damage: a computational account. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 77-9450n然而，对于无生命物体来说，通常，一些特征对于特定的项目来说，恰好是关键的，但是与其它特征之间并没有较高的相关n因此，这些特征的神经病理学损伤，将影响特定项目上的作业。这样，同有生命物体范畴不同，在无生命物体范畴内，成员的损伤具有 的性质Devlin J, Gonnerman L, Andersen E, Seidenberg M. 1998. Category-specific sem

29、antic deficits in focal and widespread brain damage: a computational account. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 77-94Caramazza, A., & Mahon, B.Z. (2003). The organization of conceptual knowledge: the evidence from category-specific semantic deficits. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 354-360

30、52Very recent development of these theoriesnEvidence from functional neuroimaging of the human brain indicates that information about of an object-such as what it looks like, how it moves, and how it is used-is stored in sensory and motor systems active when that information was acquirednAs a result

31、, object concepts belonging to different categories like animals and tools are represented in partially distinct, sensory- and motor propertybased neural networksnThis suggests that object concepts are not explicitly represented, but rather emerge from weighted activity within property-based brain r

32、egionsnHowever, some property-based regions seem to show a categorical organization, thus providing evidence consistent with category-based, domain-specific formulations as wellMartin, A. (2007). The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 25-4553Distributed

33、Domain-Specific Hypothesis (Mahon & Caramazza, 2009)nThe first order principle of organization is nWithin any given domain of knowledge, there will be functional and neural specialization according to of knowledgeMahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2009). Concepts and categories: A cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 27-515455One of Future DirectionsnAre different domains of knowledge represented differently in males and females?nSome researchers have highlighted the fact that patients w