Journal of Experimental Psychology : General VOL . 113 , No . 2 JUNE 1984 Objects , Parts , and Categories

By Barbara Tversky, K. Hemenway. 2005

Subfields: Cognitive Science & Psychology

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Science & Psychology

Citations in the corpus

POOF: Part-Based One-vs.-One Features for Fine-Grained Categorization, Face Verification, and Attribute Estimation (2013, background): “Fine-grained visual categorization also conveniently enables part-based approaches, because objects within the same basic-level category will often have the “same” parts [25], allowing for easier comparison.”
Category use and category learning. (2003, background): “Category labels indicate the whole object, whereas category features indicate parts of objects (Miller & Johnson-Laird, 1976; B. Tversky & Hemenway, 1984).”
Experience-Based and On-Line Categorization of Objects in Early Infancy (2010, background): “Tversky and Hemenway (1984) contended that children first form categories based on partonomies rather than taxonomies (see also Mash, 2006; Rakison & Butterworth, 1998; Rakison & Cohen, 1999).”
Structures Of Mental Spaces (2003, background): “The narratives described “you” in an environment like a museum or a barn surrounded by objects in front, back, left, right, above, and below you (Bryant, Tversky, & Franklin, 1992; Franklin & Tversky, 1990; Franklin, Tversky, & Coon, 1972; Tversky, 1991) (see Figure 2 for a schematic of the…”
The Growth of Flexible Problem Solving: Preschool Children Use Changing Verbal Cues to Infer Multiple Word Meanings (2000, background): “This adheres to current theoretical accounts of object part perception (Biederman, 1987; Hoffman & Singh, 1997; Tversky & Hemenway, 1984).”
Comparison Facilitates Children's Learning of Names for Parts (2007, background): “An understanding of part structure is central to the understanding of objects and entities and the mechanisms they participate in (Rosch, Mervis, Gray, Johnson & Boyes-Braem, 1976; Tversky & Hemenway, 1984; Tversky, 1989).”
The Primal Mark: How the Beginning Shapes the End in the Development of Creative Ideas (2014, unknown): “…性が制限されることを示唆している5 ② 無自覚の盗作に関する研究では，従業員が創造的作業開始時に，アイデア例に触れると，その例の側面を自分のアイデアに取り込んでしまうことを示唆している6 ③ 機能的固着に関する研究では，従業員が一度ある形と機能とを関連付けてしまうと，その形と機能の関係にとらわれ，その形が果たしうる他の機能を考えることが困難になることを示唆している7 ➢ 根底にあるのは，アイデア生成時に，身近なものを基に取りかかると，最終的に開発されるアイデアの創造性が制約されてしまうということ ①…”
Measuring L2 Lexical Growth Using Hypernymic Relationships (2009, background): “The lower the word is located on the hierarchy, the more likely the word will be concrete (Lakoff, 1987; Rosch, 1973; Tversky & Hemenway, 1984).”
How Do You Tell a Blackbird from a Crow? (2013, methodology): “Experiments by Tversky and Hemenway [24] suggest that people also use properties of parts to distinguish similar classes, and bird guides often describe species in terms of their parts, as shown in Figure 3.”
iGibson 2.0: Object-Centric Simulation for Robot Learning of Everyday Household Tasks (2021, background): “This semantic structure allows us to associate characteristics to all instances of the same category [36, 37].”
Ontological considerations in GIScience (2005, methodology): “So far, proposed ‘grounding methods’ have included: (1) cognitive anchors (Tversky and Hemenway 1984, Lakoff 1987), (2) texts (Kuhn 2001), (3) actions and activities (Camara et al. 2000, Kuhn 2001), (4) linguistics (Talmy 1983, Taylor 1995, WORDNET 1998), and (5) semantics (Rosch 1973, Keil 1979,…”