| Line 141: | Line 141: | ||
♦ Landauer T., Dumais D. (2008) | ♦ Landauer T., Dumais D. (2008) | ||
[http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Latent_semantic_analysis Latent semantic analysis],<i> Scholarpedia</i>, 3(11):4356. | [http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Latent_semantic_analysis Latent semantic analysis],<i> Scholarpedia</i>, 3(11):4356. | ||
| − | [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_semantic_analysis wiki] | + | [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_semantic_analysis wiki] <br> |
<!--♦ Louwerse M., Jeuniaux P. (2008) | <!--♦ Louwerse M., Jeuniaux P. (2008) | ||
<a href="http://www.madresearchlab.org/references/LouwerseJeuniauxBookChapter08.pdf"> | <a href="http://www.madresearchlab.org/references/LouwerseJeuniauxBookChapter08.pdf"> | ||
| Line 159: | Line 159: | ||
[http://dai.fmph.uniba.sk/courses/GC/References/louwerse.symbol-interdependency.topics10.pdf Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition]. <i>Topics in Cognitive Science,</i> 1-30, doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x <!--[http://dai.fmph.uniba.sk/courses/GC/Slides/louwerse.sihypo.4x.pdf slides]--><br> | [http://dai.fmph.uniba.sk/courses/GC/References/louwerse.symbol-interdependency.topics10.pdf Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition]. <i>Topics in Cognitive Science,</i> 1-30, doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x <!--[http://dai.fmph.uniba.sk/courses/GC/Slides/louwerse.sihypo.4x.pdf slides]--><br> | ||
♦ Dove G. (2011) | ♦ Dove G. (2011) | ||
| − | [http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00242 On the need for embodied and dis-embodied cognition]. <i>Frontiers in Psychology,</i> 1:242, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00242 | + | [http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00242 On the need for embodied and dis-embodied cognition]. <i>Frontiers in Psychology,</i> 1:242, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00242 <b>[Aleš]</b> |
|- | |- | ||
|(11) <br>11.12. | |(11) <br>11.12. | ||
Revision as of 16:46, 25 September 2018
Grounded Cognition – 2-IKV-236/15
The course objective is to provide students with deeper insight into up-to-date research trends in cognitive science, from the perspective of various disciplines (psychological, neural and computational). The course focus is on grounded (embodied) cognition, and its relation to language. The course should also help students in their ability to interpret scientific papers, to formulate, present and defend ideas.
The course is a part of Master Programme in Cognitive Science.
News
- 11. 9. 2018
- We start on Tuesday, 25th September, at 10:00 in room I-23
Syllabus
Note: Papers marked with (*) are offered for student's presentation.
| Date | Topic | References |
|---|---|---|
| (1) 25.09. |
Introduction to language and concepts. |
♦ Wiki: Language |
| (2) 02.10. |
Toward embodied cognition. |
♦ Wilson M. (2002)
Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomics Bulletin Review, 9(4), 625-636. |
| (3) 09.10. |
Mirror neuron system and its role(s) in cognition. |
♦ Rizzolatti G. & Sinigaglia C. (2010)
The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: Interpretations and misinterpretations. Nature Rev. Neurosci., 11, 264-274. [Jaša] |
| (4) 16.10. |
Common coding theory, motor simulation, mental simulation. |
♦ Smith A.H. (2006)
Motor cognition and mental simulation. Chapter in Smith E. & Kosslyn S. (eds.): Cognitive Psychology: Mind and Brain, Prentice Hall, pp. 451-481. |
| (5) 23.10. |
Language as action. |
♦ Martin H. Fischer M.H., Zwaan R.A. (2008) Embodied language: A review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension. The Quaterly Journal of Exp. Psych., 61 (6), 825-850 [Alicja] |
| 30.10. | fall break | no class |
| (6) 06.11. |
Conceptual and linguistic systems - two theories. |
♦ Barsalou L. et al. (2008)
Language and simulation in conceptual processing. In: de Vega, Glenberg & Graesser (eds), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on Meaning and Cognition, OUP, 245-283. |
| (7) 13.11. |
Role(s) of language in cognition. |
♦ Mirolli M., Parisi D. (2009)
Towards a Vygotskyan cognitive robotics: The role of language as a cognitive tool. New Ideas in Psychology, doi:10.1016/j.newideapsych.2009.07.001 [Anna] |
| (8) 20.11. |
Symbol grounding problem. |
♦ Steels L. (2008)
The symbol grounding problem has been solved, so what’s next?. In: de Vega, Glenberg & Graesser (eds), Symbols and Embodiment: Debates on Meaning and Cognition, OUP, 223-244. [Maria] |
| (9) 27.11. |
Meaning as statistical covariation. |
♦ Landauer T., Dumais D. (2008)
Latent semantic analysis, Scholarpedia, 3(11):4356.
wiki |
| (10) 04.12. |
Unification attempts. |
♦ Louwerse M. (2010)
Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1-30, doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x |
| (11) 11.12. |
Grounding abstract concepts. |
♦Borghi A.M., Barca L., Binkofski F., Tummolini L. (2018)
Varieties of abstract concepts: development, use and representation in the brain. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, 373: 20170121 [Lenart] [Maximilian] |
| (12) 18.12. |
Group presentations, summary. | available references |
Grading
- Activity during the semester (40%). This includes weekly submitting inputs to the moderator and an active participation during discussions.
- Paper presentation and moderation (30%). You will select a topic for presentation (one of the papers in the syllabus), collect by email the inputs (two questions or discussion points) from other students in advance (until Sunday, 20:00), and organize them by topic. The inputs should be sent to the moderator, with the subject "author" (use the first author's surname). You will give a short intro and then moderate the discussion. The students will be divided into small groups.
- Final group presentation (10%). You will prepare a group presentation (3-4 people) on a topic relevant for the course, something you would like to emphasize.
- Final reflection (20%). You will write a two-page essay, that will include answers to two points: 1. How you understood the main issues we dealt with (trying to include open questions, if any), 2. How the learnt content enriched your existing knowledge.
- Overall grading (in %): A > 90, B > 80, C > 70, D > 60, E > 50, else Fx.