The role of causality and conceptual coherence in assessments of similarity

Conceptual coherence, which refers to concepts whose contents make sense to the perceiver, has been associated traditionally with the notion of similarity, that is, objects, events, or entities form a concept because they are similar to one another. An examination of traditional similarity-based concept theories suggests that they do not provide an adequate account for conceptual coherence. Library and Information Science needs to explore knowledge-based approaches to concept formation, which suggest that one’s knowledge of a concept includes not just a representation of its features but also an explicit representation of the causal mechanisms that people believe link those features to form a coherent whole.

[1]  E. Rosch,et al.  Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Birger Hjørland.  Domain Analysis: A Socio‐Cognitive Orientation for Information Science Research , 2005 .

[3]  Frank C. Keil,et al.  Categorisation, causation, and the limits of understanding , 2003 .

[4]  H. Albrechtsen,et al.  An analysis of some trends in classification research , 1999 .

[5]  J. Prinz.  Furnishing the Mind: Concepts and Their Perceptual Basis , 2004 .

[6]  B. Rehder.  A causal-model theory of conceptual representation and categorization. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[7]  S. Laurence,et al.  Concepts and Cognitive Science , 1999 .

[8]  Lois Mai Chan,et al.  Cataloging and Classification: An Introduction , 1994 .

[9]  A. Tversky.  Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[10]  Emilie M. Roth,et al.  The effect of context on the structure of categories , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  F. Keil.  Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development , 1989 .

[12]  A. Broadfield.  The philosophy of classification , 1946 .

[13]  Edward J. Wisniewski,et al.  Concepts and Categorization , 2002 .

[14]  G. Murphy,et al.  The Big Book of Concepts , 2002 .

[15]  Jens-Erik Mai,et al.  Classification in context: Relativity, reality, and representation , 2004 .

[16]  Clare Beghtol,et al.  Classification for information retrieval and classification for knowledge discovery: Relationships between professional and naive classifications , 2003 .

[17]  D. Gentner,et al.  Respects for similarity , 1993 .

[18]  J. Mestre,et al.  The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices , 1989, Memory & cognition.

[19]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Categories and concepts , 1984 .

[20]  L. Rips.  Similarity, typicality, and categorization , 1989 .

[21]  N. Chater,et al.  Concepts and Similarity , 1997 .

[22]  H. Albrechtsen,et al.  Toward a New Horizon in Information Science: Domain-Analysis , 1995, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[23]  Ulrike Hahn,et al.  Introduction: similarity and categorization , 2001, Similarity and Categorization.

[24]  J. Hampton.  Similarity-based categorization and fuzziness of natural categories , 1998, Cognition.

[25]  Elin K. Jacob,et al.  Classification and Categorization: Drawing the Line , 1991 .

[26]  Jesse H. Shera.  Libraries and the organization of knowledge , 1965 .

[27]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  The exemplar view , 2002 .

[28]  Evan Heit,et al.  Features of Similarity and Category-Based Induction , 2000 .

[29]  Clare Beghtol,et al.  Domain Analysis, Literary Warrant, and Consensus: The Case of Fiction Studies , 1995, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[30]  Robert L. Goldstone.  The role of similarity in categorization: providing a groundwork , 1994, Cognition.

[31]  D. Medin,et al.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence. , 1985, Psychological review.

[32]  Arthur Maltby,et al.  Sayer's manual of classification for librarians , 1975 .