體現認知的心理學觀點及研究取向

Perspectives and Approaches for Psychological Researches of Embodied Cognition

10.6129/CJP.20130410a

陳紹慶(Sau-Chin Chen)

依賴性體現 ； 情境化認知 ； 認知科學 ； 體現認知 ； dependent embodied ； situated cognition ； cognitive science ； embodied cognition

中華心理學刊

55卷3期（2013 / 09 / 01）

405 - 416

繁體中文

體現認知是當前認知心理學的重要思潮，但是體現認知研究課題在台灣認知心理學學界的發展相對晚於其它在台灣紮根的認知科學相關領域。至今尚未有分析當代體現認知觀點的專業心理學中文論文，指出體現認知如何提昇台灣認知心理學研究格局的方向。Wilson（2002）批判六種明顯影響當代心理學研究的體現認知觀點，指出在演化意義上，最佳的體現認知觀點是人體的物質條件承載心智運作的假設。另一方面，從Rowlands（2010）討論的四種非笛卡兒式認知科學架構：體現化、嵌合化、引動化與擴展化，可以找到不依賴心智表徵的訊息處理系統，描述人類心智應運作的哲學基礎。歸納兩方的觀點，確認符合體現認知的訊息處理模型，要能滿足三項條件：（一）訊息酬載物的結構與人類感官的訊息接收功能的相容性；（二）訊息酬載物呈現的訊息能被人類感官獲得的條件；（三）施予訊息酬載物的動作有益或減損訊息的獲得。以三項條件評估，訊息的可獲性是最當前台灣心理學界最有能力進行的體現認知研究課題。回顧近年嬰幼兒認知，以及情緒認知評估等基礎研究成果，顯示己有充分的研究實力。在己有研究基礎的課題中發掘體現認知意義，以及持續對體現認知觀點進行理論的批判，可能重新塑造台灣認知心理學的研究格局。

Embodied cognition has been a potential approach in the cognitive psychology, whereas embodied cognition in cognitive psychology has developed later than the other fields in cognitive science in Taiwan. Psychological reviews in Chinese that analyze current perspectives on embodied cognition are necessary to evaluate its impact on the development of cognitive psychology in Taiwan. This article analyzed the criticisms of the six views of embodied cognition by Wilson (2002). She praised the view of body based information processing system in considering the evolution of human mind. The philosophical fundamental of information processing system without mental representations is revealed in the discussions of four non-Cartesian cognitive scientific frameworks: embodied, embedded, enacted, and extended, summarized by Rowlands (2010). Summing up both perspectives, an information processing system of embodied cognition is suggested to include the following - first, the structure of information-bearing objects which is compatible with the function of human sensory organs; and second, the available information which human sensory organs receive from information-bearing objects; and last, the action on information-bearing objects that augments or diminishes the information received. In consideration of the three characteristics, information availability would be the critical topic initiating the studies of embodied cognition in Taiwan. A review of the findings in recent studies, including fundamental research on infant cognition and cognitive evaluations of emotion, revealed the potential of Taiwan cognitive psychologists to conduct the advanced researches of embodied cognition. The situation of cognitive psychology in Taiwan will change when researchers are thinking implications of embodied cognition in their research topics and criticizing perspectives of embodied cognition theoretically.

1. 王瑾婷、姜忠信(2011)。16至20個月嬰幼兒對意圖線索的理解。中華心理學刊，53，149-166。
   連結：
2. 吳進欽、姜忠信、虞燕婷(2010)。自閉症類幼兒社會注意力的探究。中華心理學刊，52，57-74。
   連結：
3. 李囿運、謝淑蘭、翁嘉英、孫蒨如、梁庚辰(2012)。情緒影片誘發的自律神經反應模式。中華心理學刊，54，527-560。
   連結：
4. 姜忠信、張閔翔(2008)。幼兒理解他人意圖的能力：語音及表情的線索。中華心理學刊，50，241-256。
   連結：
5. 曹峰銘(2008)。聲調相似度對漢語周歲嬰兒聲調知覺的影響。中華心理學刊，50，111-124。
   連結：
6. 莊麗娟(2010)。三至六歲幼兒的因果思考：法則推理。中華心理學刊，52，75-93。
   連結：
7. 莊麗娟(2009)。三～六歲幼兒對生物本質的認知：內在結構、固有潛質、身分穩定性。中華心理學刊，51，1-19。
   連結：
8. 許馨月、簡惠玲(2011)。台灣嬰兒和成人的他種族效應之探討。中華心理學刊，53，35-57。
   連結：
9. 黃啟泰、江欣茹(2006)。動作路徑、知覺顯著性、與作業限制條件對嬰幼兒模仿物體操作的影響。中華心理學刊，48，13-33。
   連結：
10. 簡惠玲、林明寬、林筠嵐(2011)。格式塔相似性原則：三至六個月大的嬰兒能利用拓撲性質或幾何性質來群組圖案嗎？。中華心理學刊，53，275-291。
    連結：
11. Cannon, W. B. (1927). The James-Lange theory of emotions: A critical examination and an alternative theory. American Journal of Psychology, 39, 106-124.
12. Bardin, J.(2012).Neuroscience: Making connections.Nature,483,394-396.
13. Barrett, L. F.(Ed.),Niedenthal, P. M.(Ed.),Winkielman, P.(Ed.)(2005).Emotion and consciousness.New York:Guilford.
14. Barsalou, L. W.(1999).Perceptual symbol systems.Behavioral and Brain Sciences,22,577-660.
15. Barsalou, L. W.,Simmons, W. K.,Barbey, A. K.,Wilson, C. D.(2003).Grounding concewptual knowledge in modality-specific systems.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,7,84-91.
16. Battig, W. F.,Monague, W. E.(1969).Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms.Journal of Experimental Psychology,80,1-46.
17. Bonin, P.(Ed.)(2004).The mental lexicon.New York:Nova Science.
18. Bridgeman, B.,Tseng, P.(2011).Embodied cognition and the perception-action link.Physics of Life Reviews,8,73-85.
19. Chan, Y.-C.,Chou, T.-L.,Chen, H.-C.,Liang, K.-C.(2012).Segregating the comprehension and elaboration processing of verbal jokes: An fMRI study.Neuroimage,61,899-906.
20. Chan, Y.-C.,Chou, T.-L.,Chen, H.-C.,Yeh, Y.-C.,Lavallee, J. P.,Liang, K.-C.(2013).Towards a neural circuit model of verbal humor processing: An fMRI study of the neural substrates of incongruity detection and resolution.Neuroimage,66,169-176.
21. Chien, S. H.,Lin, Y. L.,Qian, W.,Zhou, K.,Lin, M. K.,Hsu, H. Y.(2012).With or without a hole: Young infant's sensitivity for topological versus geometric property.Perception,41,305-318.
22. Coltheart, M.(2006).What has functional neuroimaging told us about the mind (so far)?.Cortex,42,323-331.
23. Fodor, J.(1975).The language of thought.New York:Cromwell Press.
24. Fodor, J.(1983).The modularity of mind.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
25. Fodor, J.(2008).LOT 2: The language of thought revisited.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
26. Gendron, M.,Lindquist, K. A.,Barsalou, L. W.,Barrett, L. F.(2012).Emotion words shape emotion percepts.Emotion,12,314-325.
27. Henson, R.(2005).What can functional neuroimaging tell the experimental psychologist?.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A,58,193-233.
28. Huang, C. T.(2012).Outcome-based observational learning in human infants.Journal of Comparative Psychology,126,139-149.
29. Jeng, C. I.,Lai, M. W.,Liu, I. M.(1973).Category norms in Chinese and English from bilingual subjects.Acta Psychologica Taiwanica,15,81-153.
30. Kousta, S. T.,Vigliocco, G.,Vinson, D. P.,Andrews, M.,Del Campo, E.(2011).The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,140,14-34.
31. Kuhn, D.(Ed.),Siegler, R. S.(Ed.)(1998).Handbook of child psychology.New York:Wiley.
32. Lazarus, R. S.,Folkman, S.(1984).Stress, appraisal and coping.New York:Springer.
33. Lee, Y. S.,Lee, C. L.,Yang, H. T.(2012).Effects of aging and education on false memory.The International Journal of Aging and Human Development,74,287-298.
34. Liu, H. M.,Tsao, F. M.,Kuhl, P. K.(2009).Age-related changes in acoustic modifications of Mandarin maternal speech to preverbal infants and five-year-old children: A longitudinal study.Journal of Child Language,36,909-922.
35. Markman, E. M.(1990).Constraints children place on word meanings.Cognitive Science,14,57-77.
36. Marr, D.(1982).Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information.New York:W. H. Freeman.
37. Morton, J.(1969).Interaction of information in word recognition.Psychological Review,76,165-178.
38. Neisser, U.,Becklen, R.(1975).Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events.Cognitive Psychology,7,480-494.
39. Niedenthal, P. M.(2007).Embodying emotion.Science,316,1002-1005.
40. Paco, C.(Ed.),Gomila, T.(Ed.)(2008).Handbook of Cognitive Science.Amsterdam, the Netherlands:Elsevier.
41. Perry, C.,Ziegler, J. C.,Zorzi, M.(2007).Nested inc r ement a l mode l ing in the deve lopment of computational theories: The CDP+ model of reading aloud.Psychological Review,117,273-315.
42. Perry, C.,Ziegler, J. C.,Zorzi, M.(2010).Beyond single syllables: Large-scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model.Cognitive Psychology,61,106-151.
43. Plaut, D. C.,McClelland, J. L.,Seidenberg, M. S.,Patterson, K.(1996).Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains.Psychological Review,103,56-115.
44. Rowlands, M.(2010).The new science of the mind.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
45. Seidenberg, M. S.,McClelland, J. L.(1989).A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming.Psychological Review,96,523-568.
46. Simons, D. J.,Chabris, C. F.(1999).Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events.Perception,28,1059-1074.
47. Simons, D. J.,Levin, D. T.(1997).Change blindness.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,1,261-267.
48. Simons, D. J.,Rensink, R. A.(2005).Change blindness: Past, present, and future.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,9,16-20.
49. Wales, F.(Ed.),Walker, E.(Ed.)(1976).New approaches to language mechanisms.Amsterdam, the Netherlands:North Holland.
50. Watten-Dunn, W.(Ed.)(1967).Models for the perception of speech and visual form.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
51. Wilson, M.(2002).Six views of embodied cognition.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review,9,625-636.
52. 陳學志、徐芝君(2006)。幽默創意課程對教師幽默感及創造力的影響。師大學報：教育類，51，71-93。
53. 雷可夫、詹森、周世箴譯(2006)。我們賴以生存的譬喻。台北=Taipei:聯經=Linking Publishing。
54. 蘇以文編、畢永峨編(2009)。語言與認知。台北=Taipei:國立台灣大學=National Taiwan University Press。

1. 吳美瑤(2018)。文本訊息呈現策略對幼兒口語理解影響之探討。幼兒教育年刊，29，19-38。
2. 吳美瑤(2020)。認知與學習的新觀點：體現認知在課程與教學之應用。課程與教學，23(1)，193-215。
3. (2022)。手勢與玩偶線索對幼兒代名詞推論之影響。教育學刊，59，35-76。