COGNITIVE SCIENCE FINAL EXAM REVISION QUESTIONS. ALL END
YEAR EXAM REVISION QUESTIONS AND CORRECT ANSWERS
(ALREADY GRADED A+) (2024 UPDATE)
What is the theory-theory of concepts? - ANSWER- structures that encode theoretical
principles that purport to explain the behavior of objects they represent, like scientific theories.
There is an intended contrast between "theory" versus "observation"
(a) In science the theory explains observable data
(b) In a theory-theory, the theoretical principles differ from a mere observable feature list
Caution: the comparison with scientific theories is only an analogy that highlights their
informational structure.
There are differences, e.g., concepts need not supply accurate predictions about the objects
represented.
They explain how subjects interpret the world, not how the represented objects actually behave.
How is Keil's experiment evidence for the theory-theory of concepts? raccoon/skunk - ANSWER-
Experiment: children of different age groups were told that a raccoon was painted with black
and white stripes, had smelly sacks put on it, etc.
The children were then asked if the animal is still a raccoon.
Results: children 10+ judge the animal is still a raccoon even though it satisfies the typical features
for a skunk, whereas younger children do not.
,Hypothesis: Younger children judge by observable features (including averages of them), but older
children judge by more theoretical features about inner essences.
How is Medin's and Shobin's evidence for the theory-theory of concepts? Banana/Boomerang -
ANSWER- By subject ratings, <BANANA> and <BOOMERANG> tie on typicality for being
<CURVED>.
Prototype theory predicts an equal weighting for <CURVED> in judgments involving
<BANANA> and <BOOMERANG>.
Results: prediction is not borne out. Subjects judge that a straight object is more likely to be a
<BANANA> than a <BOOMERANG>. Why?
Hypothesis: the concept <CURVED> is more closely associated with theoretical matters for the
concept <BOOMERANG> such as its design function, etc.
- Equal on typicality but unequal on explanation.
(Even though they are equally curved, people know boomerangs are designed to be curved and so
it is more necessary in explaining the "theory" of a boomerang.)
How does the classical and prototype theory of concepts fail to match up to the theory-theory of
concepts? - ANSWER- (a) Classical definitions need not contain theoretical information.
E.g., the definition of <Bachelor> lacks "theories" of bachelors, how they occur, their link to social
institutions, etc.
(b) Prototypes need not contain theoretical information either.
,A prototypical feature list is often based on observable features. Compare the observable features
of <Bird> versus its scientific essence, genetic constitution, evolutionary history, etc.
(c) Ditto for exemplars.
Explain the horse/zebra experiment and the two ways it could be interpreted - ANSWER- E.g.,
adult subjects were told that an animal was born to horse parents, given an experimental diet, then
looked and behaved like a zebra.
Result: only 1/3 said the animal remained a horse, 2/3 said it was a zebra.
Hypothesis: sometimes observable features of a prototype are more important than theoretical
knowledge about essence.
Alternate Hypothesis: perhaps subjects believed that the experimental diet changed the scientific
essence, pace the theory theory.
What is the criticism that the theory-theory cannot account for shared and constant meaning. -
ANSWER- Theories and sub-theories are highly idiosyncratic.
- Theories change in the same individual over time via the development and acquisition of
knowledge.
- Theories differ from one individual to the next. (your theory of democracy might differ than
mine)
Compare the theoretical meaning of <ATOM> for an ancient Greek versus a 19th century physicist
versus contemporary physicists.
If concepts are theories, people rarely think and express the same thoughts!
, Bad for communication
Bad for scientific prediction
Response: perhaps concepts have "multiple components," and a change in one does not change all
of its meaning. So something is still shared
Eric Lormand, "How to be a Meaning Holist," Journal of Philosophy (1996).
E.g., suppose a child's concept <BIRD> = <[feathered], [flies], [animal], [thing similar to samples
B1,...,Bn].
Then even if the child changes a theoretical component [animal], the other components remain
constant.
What is Malt's experiment concerning judgments about water and H2O. (In regard to theory-
theory) - ANSWER- Barbara Malt found that beliefs about scientific essences does not always
coincide with categorization of concepts
Malt, "Water is not H2O," Cognitive Psychology 27 (1994): 41-70.
Test: She drew up lists of substances that people categorize as water, and substances that people
categorize as waterlike but not water. The subjects were then asked to rate the % of H2O in each
substance.
Water %H2O Nonwater %H2O
Pure 98 Tea 91
Pool 82 Saliva 89
Sewer 67 Apple Juice 77
YEAR EXAM REVISION QUESTIONS AND CORRECT ANSWERS
(ALREADY GRADED A+) (2024 UPDATE)
What is the theory-theory of concepts? - ANSWER- structures that encode theoretical
principles that purport to explain the behavior of objects they represent, like scientific theories.
There is an intended contrast between "theory" versus "observation"
(a) In science the theory explains observable data
(b) In a theory-theory, the theoretical principles differ from a mere observable feature list
Caution: the comparison with scientific theories is only an analogy that highlights their
informational structure.
There are differences, e.g., concepts need not supply accurate predictions about the objects
represented.
They explain how subjects interpret the world, not how the represented objects actually behave.
How is Keil's experiment evidence for the theory-theory of concepts? raccoon/skunk - ANSWER-
Experiment: children of different age groups were told that a raccoon was painted with black
and white stripes, had smelly sacks put on it, etc.
The children were then asked if the animal is still a raccoon.
Results: children 10+ judge the animal is still a raccoon even though it satisfies the typical features
for a skunk, whereas younger children do not.
,Hypothesis: Younger children judge by observable features (including averages of them), but older
children judge by more theoretical features about inner essences.
How is Medin's and Shobin's evidence for the theory-theory of concepts? Banana/Boomerang -
ANSWER- By subject ratings, <BANANA> and <BOOMERANG> tie on typicality for being
<CURVED>.
Prototype theory predicts an equal weighting for <CURVED> in judgments involving
<BANANA> and <BOOMERANG>.
Results: prediction is not borne out. Subjects judge that a straight object is more likely to be a
<BANANA> than a <BOOMERANG>. Why?
Hypothesis: the concept <CURVED> is more closely associated with theoretical matters for the
concept <BOOMERANG> such as its design function, etc.
- Equal on typicality but unequal on explanation.
(Even though they are equally curved, people know boomerangs are designed to be curved and so
it is more necessary in explaining the "theory" of a boomerang.)
How does the classical and prototype theory of concepts fail to match up to the theory-theory of
concepts? - ANSWER- (a) Classical definitions need not contain theoretical information.
E.g., the definition of <Bachelor> lacks "theories" of bachelors, how they occur, their link to social
institutions, etc.
(b) Prototypes need not contain theoretical information either.
,A prototypical feature list is often based on observable features. Compare the observable features
of <Bird> versus its scientific essence, genetic constitution, evolutionary history, etc.
(c) Ditto for exemplars.
Explain the horse/zebra experiment and the two ways it could be interpreted - ANSWER- E.g.,
adult subjects were told that an animal was born to horse parents, given an experimental diet, then
looked and behaved like a zebra.
Result: only 1/3 said the animal remained a horse, 2/3 said it was a zebra.
Hypothesis: sometimes observable features of a prototype are more important than theoretical
knowledge about essence.
Alternate Hypothesis: perhaps subjects believed that the experimental diet changed the scientific
essence, pace the theory theory.
What is the criticism that the theory-theory cannot account for shared and constant meaning. -
ANSWER- Theories and sub-theories are highly idiosyncratic.
- Theories change in the same individual over time via the development and acquisition of
knowledge.
- Theories differ from one individual to the next. (your theory of democracy might differ than
mine)
Compare the theoretical meaning of <ATOM> for an ancient Greek versus a 19th century physicist
versus contemporary physicists.
If concepts are theories, people rarely think and express the same thoughts!
, Bad for communication
Bad for scientific prediction
Response: perhaps concepts have "multiple components," and a change in one does not change all
of its meaning. So something is still shared
Eric Lormand, "How to be a Meaning Holist," Journal of Philosophy (1996).
E.g., suppose a child's concept <BIRD> = <[feathered], [flies], [animal], [thing similar to samples
B1,...,Bn].
Then even if the child changes a theoretical component [animal], the other components remain
constant.
What is Malt's experiment concerning judgments about water and H2O. (In regard to theory-
theory) - ANSWER- Barbara Malt found that beliefs about scientific essences does not always
coincide with categorization of concepts
Malt, "Water is not H2O," Cognitive Psychology 27 (1994): 41-70.
Test: She drew up lists of substances that people categorize as water, and substances that people
categorize as waterlike but not water. The subjects were then asked to rate the % of H2O in each
substance.
Water %H2O Nonwater %H2O
Pure 98 Tea 91
Pool 82 Saliva 89
Sewer 67 Apple Juice 77
