Significado y representación desde una perspectiva dinamicista



Descargar 115 Kb.
Página3/3
Fecha de conversión03.12.2017
Tamaño115 Kb.
Vistas126
Descargas0
1   2   3

Erlhagen, W. & Schöner, G. (2002). Dynamic field theory of movement preparation. Psychological Review, 109, 545 – 572.

Umiltà, F., Jezzini, A., Gallese, V. & Rizzolatti, G. (2008). When pliers become fingers in the monkey motor system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105, 2209–2213.

Fadiga, L., Craighero, L., y Olivier, E. (2005). Human motor cortex excitability during the perception of others ’ action. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 15 (2), pp. 213-218.

Fagg, A. H., y Arbib, M. A. (1998). Modeling parietal-premotor interactions in primate control of grasping. Neural networks the official journal of the International Neural Network Society, 11(7-8), 1277-1303.

Fischer, M.H. & Zwaan, R.A. (2008). Grounding Cognition in Perception and Action.  Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A-Human Experimental P, 61, 825-857.

Fodor, J. A. (1975). The language of thought. Philosophical Books (Vol. 18, p. x, 214). Harvard University Press. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0149.1977.tb01728.x

Fodor, J.A. (2001). The Mind Doesn’t Work that Way. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Fogassi, L., Ferrari, P. F., Gesierich, B., Rozzi, S., Chersi, F., Rizzolatti, G., et al. (2005). Parietal lobe: from action organization to intention understanding. Science, 308(5722), 662-667.

Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., Buccino, G., Craighero, L., Fadiga, L. & Rizzolatti, G. (2001). Cortical mechanism for the visual guidance of hand grasping movements in the monkey: A reversible inactivation study. Brain a journal of neurology, BRAIN, 124(Pt 3), 571-586.

Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Luppino, G., Matelli, M., Rizzolatti, G., et al. (1996). Coding of peripersonal space in inferior premotor cortex (area F4). Journal of Neurophysiology, 76(1), 141-157.

Gallagher, (2005). How the body shapes the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gallese V. (2008). Mirror neurons and the social nature of language: The neural exploitation hypothesis. Social Neuroscience, 3, 317-333.

Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., y Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain a journal of neurology, 119 ( Pt 2(2), 593-609.

Gallese, V., Keysers, C., y Rizzolatti, G. (2004). A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(9), 396-403.

Gallese, V., y Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2(12), 493-501.

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Glenberg, A. (1997).What memory is for. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–55.

Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Thought before language: do we think ergative? In: D. Gentner and S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.) Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 493–522.

Gomila, A. (2007)  Los laberintos de la filosofía de la mente: un mapa de situación. D. Pérez Chico & M. Barroso (eds.) Pluralidad de la filosofía analítica. Ed. Plaza y Valdés, pp. 189-216.

Gomila, A. (2008) Mending or abandoning cognitivism? Symbols and Embodiment. En M. de Vega, Glenberg & Glaesser, pp. 799-834.

Gomila, A. (2011). Verbal Minds: Language and the Architecture of Cognition. Elsevier.

Gomila, A. y Calvo, F. (2008) Directions for an embodied cognitive science: towards an integrated approach. Handbook of Cognitive Science: An Embodied Approach. Francisco J. Calvo Garzón y A. Gomila (eds.), San Diego: Elsevier Publishers Limited, pp. 1-25.

Grafton S.T., Arbib M.A, Fadiga L. & Rizzolatti G. (1996). Localization of grasp representations in humans by positron emission tomography. Observation compared with imagination. Exp Brain Res 112 (1), 103-111.

Grezes, J. & Decety, J. (2002 )  Does visual perception of object afford action: Evidence from a neuroimaging study., Neuropsychologia, 40, 212-222

Grush, R. (2001) The Semantic Challenge to Computational Neuroscience. In Machaner, P. K., Grush, R., McLaughlin, P. Theory and Methods in the Neurosciences. Pittsburgh, University of Pitsburgh Press. pp 155-171

Grush, R. (2004). The emulation theory of representation: motor control, imagery and perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 377-442.

Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335–46.

Haugeland, J. (1995). Mind embodied and embedded. In (Y. Houng and J. Ho, eds.), Mind and Cognition. Taipei: Academia Sinica.

Hauk O., Johnsrude I. & Pulvermüller F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 41 (2), 301-307.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time . New York : Harper & Row .

Hodges, A. (1988). Alan Turing and the Turing Machine. In The Universal Turing Machine A HalfCentury Survey,(pp.3-15). Oxford: University Press.

Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild . Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.

Iacoboni, M., Woods, R., Brass, M., Bekkering, H., Mazziotta, J. & Rizzolatti, G. (1999). Cortical Mechanisms of Human Imitation.  Science  286  (5449): 2526–2528.

Imamizu, H., Miyauchi, S., Tamada, T., Sasaki, Y., Takino, R., Puetz, B., Yoshioka, T., & Kawato, M. (2000). Human cerebellar activity reflecting an acquired internal model of a novel tool. Nature, 403, 192-195.

Imamizu, H., Kuroda, T., Miyauchi, S., Yoshioka, T., Kawato, M. (2003). Modular organization of internal models of tools in the human cerebellum. Proceedings of the Nationa lAcademy of Sciences USA, 100, 5461-5466.

James, W. (1890). The Principles of Psychology. New York: Holt.

Janssen, P., y Shadlen, M. N. (2005). A representation of the hazard rate of elapsed time in macaque area LIP. Nature Neuroscience, 8(2), 234-241.

Jeannerod, M. (2001). Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition. NeuroImage, 14, S103-S109.

Jirak, D., Menz, M. M., Buccino, G., Borghi, A. M., & Binkofski, F. (2010). Grasping language – A short story on embodiment.  Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 19(3), 711-720. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.06.020

Johnson-Frey, S.H .(2004). The organization of action representations in posterior parietal cortex. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 40-41.

Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1996). Images, models and propositional representations. In M. de Vega, M. Intons-Peterson, PN Johnson-Laird, M. Denis, M. Marschark (eds.). Models of Visuospatial Cognition. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 90-127.

Kalaska, J. F., Scott, S. H., Cisek, P., y Sergio, L. E. (1997). Cortical control of reaching movements. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 7(6), 849-859.

Kelso, S. (1995). Dynamic Patterns . Cambridge, MA : MIT Press .

Kemmerer D., Castillo J. G., Talavage T., Patterson S. & Wiley C. (2008). Neuroanatomical distribution of five semantic components of verbs: evidence from fMRI. Brain and Language, 107 (1), 16-43.

Kintsch, W. & Van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge,MA: Cambridge University Press.

Klatky, R.L. Pellegrino, JW, McCloskey, DP, & Doherty, S. (1989). Con you squeeze a tomato? The role of motor representations in semantic sensibility judgments. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 56-77.

Laakso, A., Calvo, P., & Gomila, A. (eds.) (2008). Special issue on Dynamicism in Psychology. New Ideas in Psychology, 26/2.

Lakoff, G., y Johnson, M. (1982). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

Landauer T. & Dumais, S. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: the latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211-240.

Louwerse, MM, & Bangerter, A. (2005). Focusing attention with deictic gestures and linguistic expressions. In B.Bara, L.Barsalou, M.Bucciarelli (eds.): Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: L.Erlbaum, pp. 1331-1336.

Marcus, Gary F. (2001). The Algebraic Mind: Integrating Connectionism and Cognitive Science (Learning, Development, and Conceptual Change), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Maturana, H. R., y Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Boston: Reidel

Maturana, H. R., y Varela, F. J. (1987). The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Boston: Shambhala.

Mazzoni, P., Bracewell, R. M., Barash, S., y Andersen, R. A. (1996). Motor intention activity in the macaque's lateral intraparietal area. I. Dissociation of motor plan from sensory memory. Journal of Neurophysiology, 76(3), 1439-1456.

McNeill, D. (1992).  Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought.  Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Menz M. M. & Binkofski F. (2008). Broca's region beyond language. The omnifariousness of Broca's region. Rivista Medica 14, 51-55.

Merleau-Ponty, M. ( 1962 ). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness . In C. Smith (Ed.), Phenomenology of Perception. London : Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Meteyard, L. & Vigliocco, G. (2008). The role of sensory and motor information in semantic representation. In Calvo, P., Gomila, A. (Eds.). Handbook of Cognitive Science: An Embodied Approach  (pp. 293-312). Elsevier.

Murata, A., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., Gallese, V., Raos, V. & Rizzolatti, G. (1997). Object representation in the ventral premotor cortex (area F5) of the monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 78(4), 2226-2230.

Newell, A. (1980). Physical symbol systems. Cognitive Science, 4, 135–83.

Pecher, D. & Zwaan, R., Eds. (2005). Grounding Cognition: The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language and Thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.

Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R. & Barsalou, L.W. (2003).  Verifying different-modality properties for concepts produces switching costs.  Psychological Science, 14, 119-124.

Pezzulo, G. (2008). Coordinating with the Future: the anticipatory nature of representation. Minds and Machines, 18, 179-225.

Pfeiffer, R. & Bongard, J. C. (2007). How the Body Shapes the Way We Think, A New View of Intelligence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Pinker, S. (1997). How the Mind Works. New York, NY: Norton.

Platt, M. L., y Glimcher, P. W. (1997). Responses of intraparietal neurons to saccadic target and visual distractors. Journal of Neurophysiology, 78(3), 1574-1589

Platt, M. L., y Glimcher, P. W. (1999). Neural correlates of decision variables in parietal cortex. Nature, 400(6741), 233-238. 1869-1875.

Port , R. & Van Gelder , T. (1995). Mind as Motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .

Prinz, J. (2002). Furnishing the mind: concepts and their perceptual basis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129-154.

Prinz, W. (2002). Experimental approaches to imitation. In A.N. Meltzoff & W. Prinz (eds.): The imitative mind: development, evolution and brain bases. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 143-162.

Pulvermüller F. (2005). Brain mechanisms linking language and action, Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6 (7), 576-582.

Pulvermuller, F.  & Fadiga, L . (2010).  Active perception: sensorimotor circuits as a cortical basis for language, Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(5), 351-260. 

Pulvermuller, F.  (2000).  How and where are words represented and processed in the brain?, Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on language, brain and verbal behavior, Academic Press, New York.

Pulvermüller, F., Lutzenberger, W., & Preissl, H. (1999). Nouns and verbs in the intact brain: evidence from event-related potentials and high-frequency cortical responses. Cerebral Cortex, 9, 498–508.

Rizzolatti, G. & Craighero L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169-192.

Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Gallese, V. & Fogassi, L. (1996). Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cognitive Brain Research, 3(2), 131-141.

Romo, R., Hernández, A., Zainos, A., Lemus, L., y Brody, C. D. (2002). Neuronal correlates of decision-making in secondary somatosensory cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 5(11), 1217-1225.

Roy, D. y Pentland, A. (2002). Learning Words from Sights and Sounds: a computational model. Cognitive Science, 26(1): 113-146.

Rumelhart, D.E., J.L. McClelland and the PDP Research Group (1986). Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Volume 1: Foundations, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Santiago, J., Román, A. & Ouellet, M. (2011) Flexible foundations of abstract thought: A review and a theory. In: Maas, A. & Schubert, T. (Eds). "Spatial dimensions of social thought". Mouton de Gruyter.

Searle, J. (1980). Minds, brains and programmes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417-424.

Shapiro, L. (2011) Embodied Cognition. New York: Routledge.

Simon, H., & Newell, A. (1962). Computer Simulation of Human Thinking and Problem Solving. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 27(2), 137–150.

Smeets, J. & Brenner, E. (2008). Why we don’t mind to be inconsistent. En P. Calvo y A. Gomila (eds.). Handbook of Cognitive Science: an embodied approach. Elsevier, pp. 207-217.

Snyder, L. H., Batista, A. P., & Andersen, R. A. (2000). Intention-related activity in the posterior parietal cortex: a review. Vision Research, 40(10-12), 1433-1441.

Spence, C., Nicholls, M. & Driver, J. (2000). The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality. Perception and Psychophysics, 63, 330-336.

Sperber, D. (1996) Explaining culture a naturalistic approach, Blackwell: Oxford.

Spivey, M. (2008). The continuity of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Spivey, M., Grosjean, M., & Knowblich, G. (2005). Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors: thinking with your hands. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 10393-10398.

Steels, L. & Spranger, M.  (2008). Can Body Language Shape Body Image?.  In Bullock, S., Noble, J., Watson, R. and Bedau, M. A., editor,  Artificial Life XI: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on the Simulation and Synthesis of Living Systems,  pages 577-584, Cambridge, MA:  MIT Press.

Stewart, J., Gapenne, O., & di Paolo, E. (eds.). Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for Cognitive Science. MIT Press.

Thelen, E. & Smith, L. (1994). A Dynamical Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action. Cambridge, Massachussets: MIT Press.

Tipper, S. P., Howard, L. A., & Houghton, G. (1998). Action-based mechanisms of attention. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London - Series B: Biological Sciences, 353(1373), 1385-1393.

Tipper, S.P., Howard, L.A. & Houghton, G. (2000). Behavioral consequences of selection from neural population codes. En S. Monsell y J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 223-246). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Turvey M (1977). Preliminaries to a theory of action with reference to vision. In R Shaw, J Bransford, Eds. Perceiving, Action and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology (pp. 211–65). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Umiltá M.A., Kohler E., Gallese V., Fogassi L., Fadiga L., Keysers C. & Rizzolatti G. (2001) I know what you are doing: a neurophysiological study. Neuron, 31, 155-165.

Van Dijk, T.A. & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

Varela , F. , Rosch , E. , & Thompson , E. (1991). The Embodied Mind . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D.P., Woolfe, T., Dye, M.W., & Woll, B. (2005). Words, signs and imagery: when the language makes the difference. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 272, 1859-1863.

Vilarroya, O. (2002). La disolución de la mente. Barcelona: Tusquets.

Welsh, T. N., Elliott, D., y Weeks, D. J. (1999). Hand deviations toward distractors. Evidence for response competition. Experimental Brain Research, 127(2), 207-212.

Wilson, M. & Knoblich, G. (2005). The case for motor involvement in perceiving conspecifics. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 460-473.

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 625-636.

Wilson, T. (2002). Strangers to Ourselves. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wolpert, D.M., Doya, K., & Kawato, M. (2003). A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 358, 593-602.

Zwaan, R.A. & Yaxley, R.H. (2003). Spatial iconicity affects semantic-relatedness judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 954-958.

Zwaan, R.A. (2008). Experiential traces and mental simulations in language comprehension. In De Vega, Glenberg & Graesser (2008), pp. 165-180.

Zwaan, R.A., Stanfield, R.A. & Yaxley, R.H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects.  Psychological Science, 13, 168-171.



1 A.G. ha recibido el apoyo de la Dirección General de Investigación, a través del proyecto FFI2009-13416-C02; y de la Fundación Séneca-Agencia de Ciencia y Tecnología de la Región de Murcia (II PCTRM 2007-2010), a través del Proyecto 11944/PHCS/09. F.G.P. ha recibido apoyo del proyecto Design, Accessibility and Reception del grupo TRANSMEDIA del Centro de Accesibilidad e Inteligencia Ambiental de Cataluña, financiado por el Departamento de Universidades, Investigación y Sociedad de la Información de la Generalitat de Catalunya (2009SGR0700), y agradece a A. Maiche sus orientaciones para la tesis de maestría que constituyó el germen de este trabajo.

2 El enfoque del “significado corporeizado” o de los “símbolos perceptivos” no es el único que se ha desarrollado. Dejamos para otro trabajo la discusión de uno de los programas alternativos más influyentes: el enfoque de la metáfora conceptual o de los “fundamentos sólidos” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, 1999; Mandler, 1992). En este programa, la corporalidad proporciona los esquemas conceptuales básicos, derivados del modo de interacción con el mundo facilitado por nuestra configuración corporal. Tales esquemas básicos ofrecen la base metafórica para la comprensión de contenidos abstractos. Aunque a veces no se insiste suficientemente en las diferencias, constituye en nuestra opinión un programa más sofisticado en su tratamiento de la abstracción conceptual, aun al nivel básico, aunque su relevancia se reduce a un ámbito más específico. Para una presentación y discusión de este enfoque, véase Santiago, J., Román, A. & Ouellet, M. (2011).

3 Del mismo modo, parece ignorar el problema de los conceptos para los que no hay una imagen que corresponda, como es el caso de la negación (Fodor, 1975). Barsalou (1999) se da cuenta del problema, pero lo deja de lado. Johnson-Laird (2002), en cambio, modifica su concepción perceptiva de los modelos mentales por una concepción más abstracta, para poder acomodarla.

4 Cuando aparece, la discretitud se puede entender más bien como un efecto del propio lenguaje (Gomila, 2011), aunque este punto requiere un tratamiento específico.





Compartir con tus amigos:
1   2   3


La base de datos está protegida por derechos de autor ©psicolog.org 2019
enviar mensaje

enter | registro
    Página principal


subir archivos