Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Situated Cognition Research

Part of the book series: Studies in Brain and Mind ((SIBM,volume 23))

  • 195 Accesses

Abstract

In the last three decades, an interdisciplinary research program - called “the 4E approaches” - highlighted the necessity of rethinking the theoretical assumptions and experimental practices of mainstream cognitive science. However, the claim of the disruptive potential of 4E research grows old without seeing the announced and wanted effects on how cognitive phenomena are studied. This introduction to the edited volume “Situated Cognition Research: Methodological Foundations” focuses on the method(olog)ical issues of the 4Es, the loosely connected but promising methodical options available in the debate, and the foundational questions that need to be answered if we aim to develop a 4E methodology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, F., & Aizawa, K. (2001). The bounds of cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 14(1), 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen-Hermanson, S. (2013). Superdupersizing the mind: Extended cognition and the persistence of cognitive bloat. Philosophical Studies, 164(3), 791–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amon, M. J., & Favela, L. H. (2019). Distributed cognition criteria: Defined, operationalized, and applied to human-dog systems. Behavioural Processes, 162, 167–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. L., Richardson, M. J., & Chemero, A. (2012). Eroding the boundaries of cognition: Implications of embodiment. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4(4), 717–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barandiaran, X., & Moreno, A. (2008). Adaptivity: From metabolism to behavior. Adaptive Behavior, 16(5), 325–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnier, A. J., Sutton, J., Harris, C. B., & Wilson, R. A. (2008). A conceptual and empirical framework for the social distribution of cognition: The case of memory. Cognitive Systems Research, 9(1–2), 33–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechtel, W., & Bich, L. (2021). Grounding cognition: Heterarchical control mechanisms in biology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 376(1820), 20190751.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandom, R. (1994). Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandom, R. (2009). How analytic philosophy has failed cognitive science. TAP-2009 Towards an Analytic Pragmatism, 121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand McNally & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper, M. O. (2019). Social enactivism: On situating high-level cognitive states and processes. De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper, M. O., & Artese, G. F. (2023). A methodological response to the motley crew argument: Explaining cognitive phenomena through enactivism and ethology. In J. M. Viejo & M. Sanjuán (Eds.), Life and Mind (pp. 27–48). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casper, M. O., & Haueis, P. (2022). Stuck in between. Phenomenology’s explanatory dilemma and its role in experimental practice. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 22(7), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemero, A., & Silberstein, M. (2008). After the philosophy of mind: Replacing scholasticism with science. Philosophy of Science, 75(1), 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A. (1998). Embodiment and the philosophy of mind. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 43, 35–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Haan, S. (2020). Enactive psychiatry. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • De Jaegher, H. (2018). The intersubjective turn. In A. Newen, L. De Bruin, & S. Gallagher (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition (pp. 453–467). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jaegher, H., & Di Paolo, E. (2007). Participatory sense-making. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 6(4), 485–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jaegher, H., & Froese, T. (2009). On the role of social interaction in individual agency. Adaptive Behavior, 17(5), 444–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach, C., Rieger, M., Massen, C., & Prinz, W. (2013). Action-sentence compatibility: The role of action effects and timing. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farina, M. (2021). Embodied cognition: Dimensions, domains and applications. Adaptive Behavior, 29(1), 73–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Favela, L. H. (2020). Cognitive science as complexity science. Cognitive Science, 11(4), e1525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Favela, L. H., Amon, M. J., Lobo, L., & Chemero, A. (2021). Empirical evidence for extended cognitive systems. Cognitive Science, 45(11), e13060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feest, U. (2019). Why replication is overrated. Philosophy of Science, 86(5), 895–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, S. (2003). Phenomenology and experimental design. Toward a phenomenologically enlightened experimental science. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10(9–10), 85–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldinger, S. D., Papesh, M. H., Barnhart, A. S., Hansen, W. A., & Hout, M. C. (2016). The poverty of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 959–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heyes, C. (2018). Cognitive gadgets: The cultural evolution of thinking. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, T., & Hoque, Z. (2006). Triangulation approaches to accounting research. In Z. Hoque (Ed.), Methodological issues in accounting research: Theories and methods (pp. 562–572). Spiramus Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutto, D. D., & Myin, E. (2012). Radicalizing enactivism: Basic minds without content. MIT press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ibanez, A. (2022). The mind’s golden cage and cognition in the wild. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(12), 1031–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingstone, A., Smilek, D., & Eastwood, J. D. (2008). Cognitive ethology: A new approach for studying human cognition. British Journal of Psychology, 99(3), 317–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirchhoff, M. D., & Kiverstein, J. (2019). Extended consciousness and predictive processing: A third-wave view. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Körner, A., Topolinski, S., & Strack, F. (2015). Routes to embodiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krois, J. M. (2018). Philosophy and iconology. In M. Lauschke, J. Schiffler, & F. Engel (Eds.), Ikonische Formprozesse. Zur Philosophie des Unbestimmten in Bildern (pp. 1–27). De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyselo, M., & Tschacher, W. (2014). An enactive and dynamical systems theory account of dyadic relationships. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, M., & Chemero, A. (2014). Structure and application of dynamical models in cognitive science. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 36(36).

    Google Scholar 

  • Malafouris, L. (2021). How does thinking relate to tool making? Adaptive Behavior, 29(2), 107–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1991). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living (Vol. 42). Springer Science & Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menary, R. (2012). Cognitive practices and cognitive character. Philosophical Explorations, 15(2), 147–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miłkowski, M., Clowes, R., Rucińska, Z., Przegalińska, A., Zawidzki, T., Krueger, J., et al. (2018). From wide cognition to mechanisms: A silent revolution. Frontiers in Psychology, 2393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyahara, K., Niikawa, T., Hamada, H. T., & Nishida, S. (2020). Developing a short-term phenomenological training program: A report of methodological lessons. New Ideas in Psychology, 58, 100780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mook, D. G. (1983). In defense of external invalidity. American Psychologist, 38(4), 379–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moseley, R., Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2015). Grounding and embodiment of concepts and meaning: A neurobiological perspective. In Y. Coello & M. H. Fischer (Eds.), Perceptual and Emotional Embodiment (pp. 101–122). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newen, A., De Bruin, L., & Gallagher, S. (2018). The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nowakowski, P. R. (2017). Bodily processing: The role of morphological computation. Entropy, 19(7), 295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohl, S., & Rolfs, M. (2017). Saccadic eye movements impose a natural bottleneck on visual short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(5), 736.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Regan, J. K., & Noë, A. (2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(5), 939–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orne, M. T., & Holland, C. H. (1968). On the ecological validity of laboratory deceptions. International Journal of Psychiatry, 6(4), 282–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeifer, R., Lungarella, M., & Iida, F. (2007). Self-organization, embodiment, and biologically inspired robotics. Science, 318(5853), 1088–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piccinini, G. (2022). Situated neural representations: Solving the problems of content. Frontiers in Neurorobotics, 16–846979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinna, B., & Conti, L. (2021). Illusory figures: From logic to phenomenology. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8(2), 164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pokropski, M. (2021). Mechanisms and consciousness: Integrating phenomenology with cognitive science. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reséndiz-Benhumea, G. M., Sangati, E., & Froese, T. (2020). Levels of coupling in dyadic interaction: An analysis of neural and behavioral complexity. 2020 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), 2250–2256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, P., & Aydede, M. (Eds.). (2009). The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolfs, M., & Ohl, S. (2021). Moving fast and seeing slow? The visual consequences of vigorous movement. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 44, e131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolfs, M., & Schweitzer, R. (2022). Coupling perception to action through incidental sensory consequences of motor behaviour. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(2), 112–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowlands, M. (2009). Extended cognition and the mark of the cognitive. Philosophical Psychology, 22(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Satne, G. (2015). The social roots of normativity. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 14(4), 673–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, L. (2010). Embodied cognition. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sonkusare, S., Breakspear, M., & Guo, C. (2019). Naturalistic stimuli in neuroscience: Critically acclaimed. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(8), 699–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, P. (2009). Mind the consequences of inferentialism and normativism: Conceptual mental episodes ain’t in the head (at all). TAP-2009 Towards an Analytic Pragmatism, 112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strack, F., Martin, L. L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 768–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, J. (2010). Exograms and interdisciplinarity. History, the extended mind, and the civilizing process. In R. Menary (Ed.), The extended mind (pp. 189–226). MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E., & Varela, F. J. (2001). Radical embodiment: Neural dynamics and consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(10), 418–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tribble, E. (2005). Distributing cognition in the globe. Shakespeare Quarterly, 56(2), 135–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tschacher, W., & Dauwalder, J. P. (Eds.). (2003). The dynamical systems approach to cognition: Concepts and empirical paradigms based on self-organization, embodiment, and coordination dynamics (Studies of nonlinear phenomena in life science Vol. 10). World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Herik, J. C. (2021). Rules as resources: An ecological-enactive perspective on linguistic normativity. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 20(1), 93–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F. J. (1996). Neurophenomenology: A methodological remedy for the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 3(4), 330–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villalobos, M., & Dewhurst, J. (2017). Why post-cognitivism does not (necessarily) entail anti-computationalism. Adaptive Behavior, 25(3), 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villalobos, M., & Dewhurst, J. (2018). Enactive autonomy in computational systems. Synthese, 195(5), 1891–1908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenmakers, E. J., Beek, T., Dijkhoff, L., Gronau, Q. F., Acosta, A., Adams, R. B., Jr., et al. (2016). Registered replication report: Strack, Martin, & Stepper (1988). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 917–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagman, J. B., & Chemero, A. (2014). The end of the debate over extended cognition. In T. Solymosi & J. R. Shook (Eds.), Neuroscience, neurophilosophy and pragmatism (pp. 105–124). Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willems, R. M., & Francken, J. C. (2012). Embodied cognition: Taking the next step. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zednik, C. (2011). The nature of dynamical explanation. Philosophy of Science, 78(2), 238–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Philosophy, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany

    Mark-Oliver Casper & Giuseppe Flavio Artese

Authors
  1. Mark-Oliver Casper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giuseppe Flavio Artese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark-Oliver Casper .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany

    Mark-Oliver Casper

  2. Department of Philosophy, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany

    Giuseppe Flavio Artese

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Casper, MO., Artese, G.F. (2023). Introduction. In: Casper, MO., Artese, G.F. (eds) Situated Cognition Research. Studies in Brain and Mind, vol 23. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39744-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation