25 found
Sort by:
  1. James A. Hampton (2014). Conceptual Combination: Extension and Intension. Commentary on Aerts, Gabora, and Sozzo. Topics in Cognitive Science 6 (1):53-57.
    Aerts et al. provide a valuable model to capture the interactive nature of conceptual combination in conjunctions and disjunctions. The commentary provides a brief review of the interpretation of these interactions that has been offered in the literature, and argues for a closer link between the more traditional account in terms of concept intensions, and the parameters that emerge from the fitting of the Quantum Probability model.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. James A. Hampton (2013). Quantum Probability and Conceptual Combination in Conjunctions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):290 - 291.
    I consider the general problem of category conjunctions in the light of Pothos & Busemeyer (P&B)'s quantum probability (QP) account of the conjunction fallacy. I argue that their account as presented cannot capture the – the case in which a class is a better member of a conjunction A^B than it is of either A or B alone.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Michael Gibbert, James A. Hampton, Zachary Estes & David Mazursky (2012). The Curious Case of the Refrigerator–TV: Similarity and Hybridization. Cognitive Science 36 (6):992-1018.
    This article examines the role of similarity in the hybridization of concepts, focusing on hybrid products as an applied test case. Hybrid concepts found in natural language, such as singer songwriter, typically combine similar concepts, whereas dissimilar concepts rarely form hybrids. The hybridization of dissimilar concepts in products such as jogging shoe mp3 player and refrigerator TV thus poses a challenge for understanding the process of conceptual combination. It is proposed that models of conceptual combination can throw light on the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. James A. Hampton, Margaret Dillane, Laura Oren & Louise Worgan (2011). Conjunctions of Social Categories Considered From Different Points of View. Anthropology and Philosophy 10:31-57.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Erin H. Thompson & James A. Hampton (2011). The Effect of Relationship Status on Communicating Emotions Through Touch. Cognition and Emotion 25 (2):295-306.
  6. James A. Hampton (2010). Concepts in Human Adults. In Denis Mareschal, Paul Quinn & Stephen E. G. Lea (eds.), The Making of Human Concepts. Oup Oxford. 14.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. James A. Hampton (2010). Concept Talk Cannot Be Avoided. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2/3):212-213.
    Distinct systems for representing concepts as prototypes, exemplars, and theories are closely integrated in the mind, and the notion of concept is required as a framework for exploring this integration. Eliminating the term from our theories will hinder rather than promote scientific progress.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. James A. Hampton, M. C. Jönsson & Alessia Passanisi (2009). The Modifier Effect: Default Inheritance in Complex Noun Phrases. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. 303--308.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Daniel Heussen, Silvio Aldrovandi, Petko Kusev & James A. Hampton (2009). Explanations of Comparative Facts: A Shift in Focus. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. James A. Hampton (2008). Context, Categories and Modality: Challenges for the Rumelhart Model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31 (6):716-717.
    Three issues are raised in this commentary. First, the mapping of semantic information into the different layers could be done in a more realistic way by using the Context layer to represent situational contexts. Second, a way to differentiate category membership information from other property information needs to be considered. Finally, the issue of modal knowledge is raised.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Daniel Heussen & James A. Hampton (2008). Ways of Explaining Properties. In B. C. Love, K. McRae & V. M. Sloutsky (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society. 143--148.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Martin L. Jönsson & James A. Hampton (2008). On Prototypes as Defaults (Comment on Connolly, Fodor, Gleitman and Gleitman, 2007). Cognition 106 (2):913-923.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. James A. Hampton (2007). Typicality, Graded Membership, and Vagueness. Cognitive Science 31 (3):355-384.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. James A. Hampton (2005). Modeling Category Coordination: Comments and Complications. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):496-497.
    Consideration of color alone can give a misleading impression of the three approaches to category coordination: the nativist, empiricist and culturalist models. Empiricist models can benefit from a wider range of correlational information in the environment. Also, all three approaches may explain a set of perceptual categories within the human repertoire. Finally, a suggestion is offered for supplementing the naming game by varying the social status of agents.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. James A. Hampton (2005). Rules and Similarity – a False Dichotomy. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):26-26.
    Unless restricted to explicitly held, sharable beliefs that control and justify a person's behavior, the notion of a rule has little value as an explanatory concept. Similarity-based processing is a general characteristic of the mind-world interface where internal processes (including explicitly represented rules) act on the external world. The distinction between rules and similarity is therefore misconceived.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. James A. Hampton (2002). Language’ Role in Enabling Abstract, Logical Thought. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):688-688.
    Carruthers’ thesis is undermined on the one hand by examples of integration of output from domain-specific modules that are independent of language, and on the other hand by examples of linguistically represented thoughts that are unable to integrate different domain-specific knowledge into a coherent whole. I propose a more traditional role for language in thought as providing the basis for the cultural development and transmission of domain-general abstract knowledge and reasoning skills.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. James A. Hampton (2000). Concepts and Prototypes. Mind and Language 15 (2-3):299-307.
  18. James A. Hampton (1999). Implicit and Explicit Knowledge: One Representational Medium or Many? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):769-770.
    In Dienes & Perner's analysis, implicitly represented knowledge differs from explicitly represented knowledge only in the attribution of properties to specific events and to self-awareness of the knower. This commentary questions whether implicit knowledge should be thought of as being represented in the same conceptual vocabulary; rather, it may involve a quite different form of representation.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. James A. Hampton (1998). Folk Biology and External Definitions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (4):574-574.
    Atran's thesis has strong implications for the doctrine of externalism in concepts (Fodor 1994). Beliefs about biological kinds may involve a degree of deference to scientific categories, but these categories are not truly scientific. They involve instead a folk view of science itself.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. James A. Hampton (1998). Similarity-Based Categorization and Fuzziness of Natural Categories. Cognition 65 (2-3):137-165.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. James A. Hampton (1998). Staying in Touch: Externalism Needs Descriptions. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):74-74.
    Externalism cannot work as a theory of concepts without explaining how we reidentify substances as being of the same kind. Yet this process implies just the level of descriptive content to which externalism seeks to deny a role in conceptual content.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. James A. Hampton (1997). Emergent Attributes in Combined Concepts. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith & J. Viad (eds.), Creative Thought: An Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes. American Psychological Association. 83--110.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. James A. Hampton (1989). Concepts and Correct Thinking. Mind and Language 4 (1-2):35-42.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. James A. Hampton (1989). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Mind and Language 4 (1-2):130-137.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. James A. Hampton (1982). A Demonstration of Intransitivity in Natural Categories. Cognition 12 (2):151-164.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation