10 found
Order:
  1.  61
    Brian Riordan & Michael N. Jones (2011). Redundancy in Perceptual and Linguistic Experience: Comparing Feature-Based and Distributional Models of Semantic Representation. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):303-345.
    Abstract Since their inception, distributional models of semantics have been criticized as inadequate cognitive theories of human semantic learning and representation. A principal challenge is that the representations derived by distributional models are purely symbolic and are not grounded in perception and action; this challenge has led many to favor feature-based models of semantic representation. We argue that the amount of perceptual and other semantic information that can be learned from purely distributional statistics has been underappreciated. We compare the representations (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  2.  76
    Brendan T. Johns & Michael N. Jones (2012). Perceptual Inference Through Global Lexical Similarity. Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):103-120.
    The literature contains a disconnect between accounts of how humans learn lexical semantic representations for words. Theories generally propose that lexical semantics are learned either through perceptual experience or through exposure to regularities in language. We propose here a model to integrate these two information sources. Specifically, the model uses the global structure of memory to exploit the redundancy between language and perception in order to generate inferred perceptual representations for words with which the model has no perceptual experience. We (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  3.  27
    Thomas T. Hills, Peter M. Todd & Michael N. Jones (2015). Foraging in Semantic Fields: How We Search Through Memory. Topics in Cognitive Science 7 (3):513-534.
    When searching for concepts in memory—as in the verbal fluency task of naming all the animals one can think of—people appear to explore internal mental representations in much the same way that animals forage in physical space: searching locally within patches of information before transitioning globally between patches. However, the definition of the patches being searched in mental space is not well specified. Do we search by activating explicit predefined categories and recall items from within that category, or do we (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4. Michael N. Jones & Douglas J. K. Mewhort (2007). Representing Word Meaning and Order Information in a Composite Holographic Lexicon. Psychological Review 114 (1):1-37.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  5.  1
    Thomas M. Gruenenfelder, Gabriel Recchia, Tim Rubin & Michael N. Jones (2016). Graph‐Theoretic Properties of Networks Based on Word Association Norms: Implications for Models of Lexical Semantic Memory. Cognitive Science 40 (6):1460-1495.
    We compared the ability of three different contextual models of lexical semantic memory and of a simple associative model to predict the properties of semantic networks derived from word association norms. None of the semantic models were able to accurately predict all of the network properties. All three contextual models over-predicted clustering in the norms, whereas the associative model under-predicted clustering. Only a hybrid model that assumed that some of the responses were based on a contextual model and others on (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  4
    Thomas M. Gruenenfelder, Gabriel Recchia, Tim Rubin & Michael N. Jones (2016). Graph‐Theoretic Properties of Networks Based on Word Association Norms: Implications for Models of Lexical Semantic Memory. Cognitive Science 40 (6):1460-1495.
    We compared the ability of three different contextual models of lexical semantic memory and of a simple associative model to predict the properties of semantic networks derived from word association norms. None of the semantic models were able to accurately predict all of the network properties. All three contextual models over-predicted clustering in the norms, whereas the associative model under-predicted clustering. Only a hybrid model that assumed that some of the responses were based on a contextual model and others on (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Thomas T. Hills, Michael N. Jones & Peter M. Todd (2012). Optimal Foraging in Semantic Memory. Psychological Review 119 (2):431-440.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Brendan T. Johns, Christine L. Sheppard, Michael N. Jones & Vanessa Taler (2016). The Role of Semantic Diversity in Word Recognition Across Aging and Bilingualism. Frontiers in Psychology 7.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Michael N. Jones, Thomas T. Hills & Peter M. Todd (2015). Hidden Processes in Structural Representations: A Reply to Abbott, Austerweil, and Griffiths. Psychological Review 122 (3):570-574.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Brian Riordan, Melody Dye & Michael N. Jones (2015). Grammatical Number Processing and Anticipatory Eye Movements Are Not Tightly Coordinated in English Spoken Language Comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology 6.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography