 |
In this site, the
PDF file is included in part. Adobe Reader of the Adobe Co. is necessary
to
inspect it. |
|
 |
 |
Workshops / Symposia
|
|
|
| | workshop
1 | workshop 2 | symposium
| workshop 3 | workshop
4 | |
Workshop 1
How the mind and culture are shaped interactively:
Bridging social and cognitive views
Organizer:
Hiroshi Yama (Kobe College, Japan)
Many of the cognitive psychologists have assumed
that human mind is universal, and have inferred
that, even if they observe cultural differences,
they are the consequences of different cultural
stimuli. Recently, some of social psychologists
have argued an interactive view that mind and culture
are shaped interactively, and this has given an
impact to cognitive psychologists. However, although
some social psychologists use cognitive tasks, their
terminology and concepts are often different from
those of cognitive psychologists'. The symposium
of "Culture and Cognition" is organized in order
to construct a bridge between the two sides. Three
speakers are invited and each of them is to talk
on cross-cultural studies between Westerners and
Easterners. J-B. Van der Henst is to talk from the
view of cognitive psychology, whereas T. Masuda
and T. Hamamura are to talk from the view of social
psychology.
Speakers
Jean-Baptiste VAN DER HENST (CNRS University of
Lyon 1, France)
Title:How is inconsistency resolved on
belief? : French and Japanese cases.
French and Japanese participants were asked to judge
or decide when they received inconsistent information
to their supposed believes. Japanese are more likely
than French to think dialectically. This is consistent
with recent cross-cultural studies of Westerners-Easterners
comparison.
Takahiko MASUDA (University of Alberta, Canada)
Title: Cultural variation in attentional
regulation between the Japanese and Westerners:
An eye-tracking study
We simply presented a blinking circle, and found
that the Japanese numbers of fixation points and
their average distance from the center were significantly
larger than those of Westerners. These results are
consistent with the cross-cultural researches that
suggests that East Asians are more likely than Westerners
to be sensitive to the contextual information.
Takeshi HAMAMURA (University of British Colombia,
Canada)
Title:Culture and regulatory focus: Cognitive
and motivational implications
We found that Japanese performed better on a task
if they were rewarded for not losing points, whereas
European-Canadians performed better when they were
rewarded for winning points. These results are discussed
based on self-esteem and concern for "face".
Workshop 2
Language-specific semantics and categorization
Abstract
Until the early 1990's, the predominant view was
that human languages share a significant number
of universal properties and that these properties
are shaped by universal cognition. In the last few
years, however, with evidence of extensive and significant
differences across languages particularly in the
semantic domain of space, the debate on language
and cognition has been re-kindled and has become,
once again, a central issue in psychology, linguistics
and cognitive science. In this debate, studies on
languages such as Korean and Mandarin-Chinese (that
are very different from much researched languages
like English) have provided crucial information
about the extent to which language influences cognition
in children and adults. In this workshop, we present
three papers showing influence of language on cognition,
specifically categorization, with data involving
English, Korean, and Mandarin-Chinese. These three
papers will be followed by a discussion paper.
Presentation 1: Soonja Choi (San Diego State University)
Presentation 2: Marianella Casasola (Cornell University)
Presentation 3: Twila Tardif, Nina Simms, Chao Liu
(University of Michigan)
Presentation 4: Discussion by Laraine McDonough
(Brooklyn College and Graduate Center of CUNY)
Presentation 1: Soonja Choi
title:Influence of Language-specific input
on spatial categorization: Categories of containment
Recent research on infant cognition has shown that
preverbal infants (9-, 11-, and 14-month-olds),
regardless of their language environments, can make
a distinction between tight-fit and loose-fit containment
relations. This distinction is systematically made
in Korean (kkita 'fit tightly' vs. nehta 'put something
loosely in a container'), but not in English (i.e.
in). The questions are, whether this nonlinguistic
sensitivity to differences in degree of fit is influenced
by the language-specific input as infants learn
their target language, and if yes, when the influence
begins to take place. Using a preferential-looking
method, Choi examined children's nonlinguistic sensitivity
to the distinction between Tight-in and Loose -in
in English- and Korean-learners at different ages:
18, 24, 29, and 36 months. The children's productive
vocabulary was also measured through language survey
filled out by the mothers. The preferential data
showed a significant decrease in sensitivity in
English learners to the differential feature (i.
e. degree of fit) between the two relations from
18-/24-month-olds to 29-/36-month-olds. In contrast,
29-/36-month-old Korean learners maintained the
distinction between the two relations. The decrease
in sensitivity to the tight/loose feature in English
learners corresponded with increase in vocabulary
level and the production of the word 'in': E children
who produced in or had high vocabulary level showed
much less sensitivity to the difference between
tight-in and loose-in than those who did not produce
in or had low vocabulary level. Thus, there is an
intimate relation between vocabulary learning and
nonlinguistic sensitivities of the relevant domain.
Presentation 2: Marianella Casasola
title:How linguistic input shapes spatial
categorization in infants and toddlers
This paper presents the author's recent findings
on the effect of teaching a novel word on toddlers'
spatial categorization. In this study, English-learning
toddlers of 21 to 22 months were taught a novel
spatial word for actions resulting in a tight-fit
spatial relation, a relation that is lexically marked
in Korean (i.e. kkita) but not in English. A second
group of toddlers viewed the actions but were not
provided with a novel word. Following this training
session, toddlers' comprehension of the novel word
was tested in a preferential-looking paradigm. Only
toddlers who were taught the novel spatial word
looked significantly longer at the tight-fit events
during the test trials that presented the novel
word than during control trials that presented neutral
linguistic stimuli. The results indicate that toddlers
can map and generalize a novel word onto actions
resulting in a tight-fit relation given limited
experience with the novel word. The results provide
insight into how young word learners begin to form
language-specific semantic spatial categories.
A second experiment further documents the influence
of linguistic input on infants' spatial categorization.
Korean- and English-learning infants of 10 and 18
months were tested on their categorization of containment
and tight-fit relations. At 10 months, infants from
both language environments formed the same spatial
categories (i.e., containment but not tight-fit).
At 18 months, however, infants formed only the spatial
category consistent with the semantic pattern of
their language. Together, the two studies begin
to delineate the role of linguistic experience in
shaping how infants and toddlers organize spatial
events into categories.
Presentation 3: Twila Tardif, Nina Simms and Chao
Liu
title:Removing the "Basic" and "Typical"
in Noun Categories: ERP and Behavioral Studies with
English and Chinese speakers
In response to a number of studies showing that
English-speakers use more noun types and that Mandarin-speakers
use more verb types when speaking (Tardif, Shatz,
& Naigles, 1997; Tardif, in press). This study explores
how object labels in Mandarin Chinese and English
differ and examines the effects of these differences
on categorization tasks. Basic-level labels (e.g.,
qi4che1 'car', huo3che1 'train', zi4xing2che1 'bicycle')
in Chinese often include the superordinate category
term (e.g., che1 'vehicle'), whereas in English,
basic-level labels do not. Study 1 examined how
this difference might affect the use of superordinate
and basic level terms by 40-English and 20 Mandarin-speaking
adults, and found that Mandarin speakers are more
likely than English speakers to replace basic level
terms with superordinate level terms. Also, English
speakers were more likely than Mandarin speakers
to replace basic level terms with other basic level
terms from the same category. Study 2 examined typicality
effects and basic-level effects in a timed typicality
rating task with 27 English-speaking and 24 Mandarin-speaking
adults with different types of categories. Across
all category types, English speakers showed similar
typicality effects for all category types, but Mandarin
speakers showed typicality effects only for certain
category types. These results were further replicated
in Study 3, a yes-no category inclusion ERP task,
with both English- and Mandarin-speakers showing
significant N400 responses to out-of-category items,
but only English-speakers showing N400 responses
to atypical category members. The data across all
three studies converge to suggest that in addition
to the differences in noun and verb use, there may
also be strong and significant differences in noun
and verb category structures that lead to important
differences in the processing of object and action
concepts for speakers of these two languages.
Presentation 4: Laraine McDonough.
Discussion
In each of the three presentations, we find that
languages differ in the kinds of semantic distinctions
are made in the domain of spatial relations (Choi
and Casasola) and object labels (Tardiff et al.).
These findings urge us to reconsider assumptions
we have held over the years about what infants need
to know before acquiring language (linguistic precursors),
the required flexibility they need to maintain during
the acquisition process, and how language then quickly
influences how infants structure their experiences
in the world as evidenced not only in verbal but
nonverbal tasks. These studies impress upon us that
the transition from preverbal to verbal thought
is a rich arena for researchers to test views on
the relation between language and thought. In her
discussion, Laraine McDonough will cover some common
assumptions made about the preverbal infant mind,
first language acquisition and how language influences
cognition. Suggestions will be made to elicit discussion
among the symposium panel and audience as to how
these views can be updated, revised and/or completely
changed to accommodate the data presented.
Long symposium
Android science
Organizers:
Karl F. MacDorman, Ph.D. (Cambridge & Osaka University)
& Hiroshi Ishiguro , (Osaka University)
Android science exploits the fact that robots that
look and act like people can elicit many kinds of
social responses from human subjects that only people
were able to elicit before. Thus, androids provide
a well-controlled experimental apparatus for testing
theories about human interaction, cognition, and
development; and a test bed for theories about how
neural or cognitive processes influence behavior.
To make the android act in a way that people see
as natural, we have to study the norms of human
interaction. But to evaluate theories about how
those norms function, we also need to implement
them in an android. In that way, androids may prove
to be a useful tool in unifying sciences that focus
on behavior and those that focus on the neural underpinnings
of behavior. We think that embodying cognitive,
neural, or social theories in androids sets a higher
bar for their evaluation because subjects apply
their model of a human Other to androids, which
they may not be doing to more mechanical-looking
robots. (For more details, please see the call for
papers at www.androidscience.com.)
What I would like to propose is that we devote up
to three 90-minute CogSci/ICCS-2006 workshop slots
to themes related to android science. One slot could
be a panel discussion focused on the Uncanny Valley:
the perceptual phenomenon that subjects may be more
sensitive to imperfections in a robot that closely
resembles a human being. The panel would consist
mainly of neuroscientists and cognitive psychologists
who have performed research in this area. I think
Hiroshi might like to propose a theme for a second
panel discussion -- for example, on explorations
of nonverbal behavior in communication, such as
his group's groundbreaking work on the social and
cognitive functions of gaze. This panel would include
roboticists and social psychologists. Finally, we
could consider having an open "call for papers"
like we did for the workshop in Stresa, and have
the third workshop filled by three 30-minute presentations
selected by peer review. Workshop Title: "Influence
of culture and language on concepts and cognitive
functions"
Workshop 3
Influence of culture and language on concepts
and cognitivefunctions
Organizers:
Mutsumi Imai (Keio University at Shonan-Fujisawa,
Japan)
Barbara Malt (Lehigh University, USA)
Speakers:
Sandra Waxman (Northwestern University)
Norbert Ross (Vanderbilt University)
Mutsumi Imai(Keio University at Shonan-Fujisawa,
Japan)
Discussant:
Barbara Malt
Overview of the panel
Whether and to what extent concepts and basic cognitive
functions are universal is of fundamental importance
for understanding of the nature of human thought.
On the one hand, a shared cognitive architecture
might be argued to provide constraints on the nature
of knowledge and thought processes that transcend
cultural differences. On the other hand, much of
human knowledge is acquired through the medium of
language and in the context of specific cultural
needs and interpretations, and thus language and
culture may filter or shape the knowledge acquired
and perhaps even the cognitive processes that typically
operate on them. In this panel, we present three
papers that examine these possibilities from different
angles to deepen our understanding of the interplay
among universally shared conceptual/cognitive constraints,
culture, and language.
Speaker:Sandra Waxman (Northwestern University)
title:Core knowledge, naming and the acquisition
of the fundamental (folk) biologic concept 'ALIVE'
I'll begin by describing (in broad strokes) a collaborative
research venture in which we focus on the acquisition
of folkbiologic knowledge (e.g., 'normative' cognitive
development). Adopting a cross-linguistic, cross-cultural,
developmental perspective, we have asked a) what
capacities infants and young children bring to the
task of acquisition and b) how the environment (including
the objects and events that populate the child's
world, the language used to describe them, and the
cultural practices invoked to highlight them) shapes
the process of acquisition. After describing briefly
the populations we have thus far included and our
research strategy for identifying the contributions
of language and culture in the acquisition of knowledge,
I'll present evidence from categorization, naming
and reasoning tasks in children and adults from
Indonesia, Mexico, and the US. This work reveals
important commonalities in early development and
also illustrates an intimate connection between
culture, language and conceptual organization in
the evolution of knowledge. In closing, I will highlight
the advantages of combining psychological, linguistic
and anthropologic methods in developing theories
of acquisition.
Speaker:Norbert Ross (Vanderbilt University)
title:Cultural Aspects in the Development
of Children's Understanding of Folkbiology
Much of the work in developmental psychology has
focused on detecting universals of human thought.
Recent developments in the field, however, make
it necessary to extend our research with respect
to two aspects: First, in order to understand cognitive
universals we need to enlarge our data base beyond
the standard populations (white urban middle class
children in industrialized countries). Second, in
order to understand children's development we have
to better understand the context of knowledge acquisition.
To do so it is not sufficient to add yet more independent
variables (such as language or culture) to our analyses,
instead we need to better understand the life context
of the children we study. In this paper I will use
data from Tzotzil Maya children in Mexico to outline
a study of child development that is sensitive to
the socio-cultural context in which the children
grow up. In this approach culture is not an independent
variable, but has more of a distributional character.
The focus of the analysis is not on mean comparisons
across different independent variables, but on tracing
patterns of agreement and disagreement to wider
social processes and the resulting background of
the individual children. Consequently this approach
brings together anthropology and psychology both
with respect to topics and theories as well as methodologies.
Speaker:Mutsumi Imai (Keio University at
Shonan-Fujisawa)
title:Influence of language, culture,
and universal cognitive constraints on the everyday
object concepts
Whether and to what extent our conceptual structure
is universal is of great importance for our understanding
of the nature of human concepts. Two major factors
that might affect our concepts are language and
culture. In this research, we investigated whether
these two factors affect our concepts of everyday
objects in any significant ways. Concerning the
linguistic factor, we tested whether a grammatical
categorization system by classifiers, which classify
objects in the world very differently from the way
nouns do, influence the conceptual structure of
speakers of classifier languages. Concerning the
culture factor, we tested a specific proposal by
Nisbett and colleagues (e.g., Nisbett, Peng, Choi,
& Norenzayan, 2001), which predicts that Westerners
organize object concepts around taxonomic relations
while Easterners organize them around thematic relations.
For this purpose, we tested children and adults
speaking two classifier languages, Chinese and Japanese,
and those speaking German, a non-classifier language,
on a range of tasks including categorization, similarity
judgment, label extension, and inductive reasoning.
The overall results indicate that the global structure
of our concepts of everyday objects is very similar
across the three different culture/language groups,
while there was much variability in the participants'
performance across different tasks. Some effect
of the classifier system was found in Chinese but
not in Japanese speakers. We discuss how language-specific
linguistic properties might affect our concepts,
categories, and cognitive processes, and how they
interact with task-specific constraints as well
as our universal cognitive dispositions.
Discussant:Barbara Malt (Lehigh University)
title:Language, culture, and cognition:
Commentary
This talk will discuss the preceding three presentations,
drawing from them lessons on when and how language
and culture may influence mental representations
and processes.
Workshop 4
Internal Observation as a Method for Constructive
Science
Organizer: Hideyuki Nakashima (Future University
- Hakodate)
Theme of the workshop:
The methodology for analytic Science is established
in the 20th Century. It was most successful in the
study of physics. However the methodology was not
allmighty. For example, experimental psychology
that followed the same direction hit its limitation
and was gradually replaced by cognitive science.
We found that this movement is also universally
observed in other areas of science. Some of the
examples are seen in artificial intelligence, architecture,
biology and geology. We intend to extract similarity
in the movements in those areas and establish a
new methodology for science, which we call "constructive
science" in contrast to "analytic science".
The new methodology we propose is tightly connected
to the internal view point of a sytem. Theorist's
view, enforced in analytic science, tries to separate
a system from its observer so that observation does
not interfere with the sytem. We believe this is
an effective attitude toward science, but not the
only one. When a system is too complex for analytical
method, the system must be observed and tested in
vivo. Observation cannot be separated from the functionality
of the system. If an observer is separated from
the system, he or she is detatched from the situation
in which the sytem operates. It is not that the
observer cannot recognize the situation itself,
but that he or she may miss the connection between
the system and the situation. We believe that the
internal observation, or agents' view (as called
in AI), is essential to understand and properly
describe situatedness fo the system.
One method of constructive science that is consistent
with the notion of "internal observation of a system"
is metacognitive verbalization. That is a method
in which an individual person, or people forming
a community, externalizes by verbalization what
she (or they) perceives, thinks and does and how
she (or they) moves her (their) own body. The effectiveness
of this method has gained growing interest in learning,
especially acquisition of embodied expertise. Just
as designers externalize still-on-going and thus
ambiguous ideas by drawing sketches in order to
develop ideas, metacognitive verbalization is not
just for record or communication to others but more
importantly for development of their own thoughts
and body performance.
In this method, a cognitive system and its observer
is the same and thus the "objective observation"
principle of analytic science is violated. A person's
verbalization, as soon as it is being conducted,
will influence how her thoughts and perception to
the world develop. Verbalization by people forming
a community will change their way of thinking, perceiving
and interacting with each other. Processes of development
of these sorts contain important aspects of human
intelligence that the conventional analytical science
was unable to capture. We claim that human intelligence
lies not just in knowledge obtained by analytical
science, but in processes of development revealed
by constructive science. The "internal observation"
methodology such as metacognitive verbalization
provides richer insights into human intelligence.
Utilization of repetitive externalization and internalization
as an cycle is important for constructive activities
such as design. As the nature of architectural design,
for example, it is essential for an architect to
use internal as well as external representation
of the things and thoughts. The representation and
the designer who produces it have reflective relations.
The representation is fluid in the sense that the
interpretation of it is situated and doesn't remain
the same. They are far from objective. It is interesting
that successful architects get along with such representation,
which is hardly dealt with by analytic science.
Consequently, some important parts in architectural
design are unleashed as science. Only traditional
methods of training may deal with them if constructive
science describes the peripheral things surrounding
what cannot be represented by 'public'language.
We found that Japanese culture is based on internal
observers' view points, and the structure of Japanese
language reflects this. In the workshop, we also
try to understand the relationship between the view
and the language (including the role of "verbalization").
In analytic science, the actor = the theorist, plays
an explicit role. In constructive science, the actor
is buried in the sytem and thus implicit. Analytic
science tries to describe central phenomena as a
rule, while constructive science rather focuses
on describing peripheral phenomena to make borders
clearer.
Related materials are found in writings of following
researchres:
Atsunobu Ichikawa (ecologist)
Baron-Cohen (psychologist)
Bin Kimura (psycho-pathologist)
Brian Smith (computer scientist)
Taki Kanaya (linguist) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Site
Top
