PDF (Not Set)
- Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
|Google Scholar:||Look up in Google Scholar|
Psychological essentialism has been subject to much debate. Yet a key implication – that people should defer to experts in categorizing natural kinds – has not been widely examined. Three experiments examine deference in the categorization of chemical kinds. The first establishes borderline cases used in the second and third. These latter show limited deference to experts, and some deference to non-experts. These data are consistent with a perspectival framework for concepts in which categorization is sometimes based on micro-structural properties and sometimes on appearance and function.
|Item Type:||Book Chapter|
|Keywords:||categorisation; concepts; deference; expertise|
|Academic Unit/Department:||Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Psychology
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS)
|Depositing User:||Nicholas Braisby|
|Date Deposited:||05 Jul 2006|
|Last Modified:||04 Oct 2016 22:31|
|Share this page:|
Download history for this item
These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.