Advertisement

On Remembering How to Get There: How We Might Want Something Like a Map

  • Keith Stenning
Part of the Nato Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 5)

Abstract

The hallmark of imagery, whether it is mental or externalized in some expressive medium, is that imagery is specific. It is the purpose of this paper to define a precise sense of specificity, to use this definition to redefine the issues between image and propositional theories of memory representations, and to present a report of an experiment which illustrates this approach to imagery.

Keywords

Recognition Test Mental Rotation Memory Representation Propositionalist Position Choice Point 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bower, G. The analysis of a mnemonic device. American Scientist, 1970, 38, 496–510.Google Scholar
  2. Downs, R. M., & Stea, D. (Eds.), Image and environment. Chicago: Aldine, 1973.Google Scholar
  3. Hardwick, D. A., Mclntyre, C. W., & Pick, H. L. The content and manipulation of cognitive maps in children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1976, 41(3, Serial No. 166).Google Scholar
  4. Kaplan, S. Cognitive maps in perception and thought. In R. M. Downs & D. Stea (Eds.), Image and environment. Chicago: Aldine, 1973.Google Scholar
  5. Kosslyn, S. M. Information representation in visual images. Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 7, 341–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kosslyn, S. M., & Pomerantz, J. R. Imagery, propositions and the form of internal representations. Cognitive Psychology, 1977, 9 (1), 52–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lynch, K. The image of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960.Google Scholar
  8. Minsky, M. A. A framework for representing knowledge. In P. H. Winston (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.Google Scholar
  9. Paivio, A. Imagery and verbal processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1971.Google Scholar
  10. Pylyshyn, Z. W. What the mind’s eye tells the mind’s brain: A critique of mental imagery. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 1971, 171, 701–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Siegel, A. W., & White, S. H. The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. In H. W. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development (Vol. 10 ). New York: Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  13. Stenning, K. Anaphora as an approach to pragmatics. In M. Halle, G. A. Miller & O. Bresnan (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, in press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keith Stenning
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of LiverpoolLiverpoolEngland, UK

Personalised recommendations