Page 252 - Foundations of Cognitive Psychology : Core Readings
P. 252

258   Eleanor Rosch

                Implications for Other Fields
                The foregoing theory of categorization and basic objects has implications for
                several traditional areas of study in psychology; some of these have been
                tested.
                Imagery
                The fact that basic-level objects were the most inclusive categories at which an
                averaged member of the category could be identified suggested that basic objects
                might be the most inclusive categories for which it was possible to form a
                mental image isomorphic to the appearance of members of the class as a whole.
                Experiments using a signal-detection paradigm and a priming paradigm, both
                of which have been previously argued to be measures of imagery (Peterson and
                Graham 1974; Rosch 1975c), verified that, in so far as it was meaningful to use
                the term imagery, basic objects appeared to be the most abstract categories for
                which an image could be reasonably representative of the class as a whole.

                Perception
                From all that has been said of the nature of basic classifications, it would hardly
                be reasonable to suppose that in perception of the world, objects were first
                categorized either at the most abstract or at the most concrete level possible.
                Two separate studies of picture verification (Rosch et al. 1976a; Smith, Balzano,
                and Walker 1978) indicate that, in fact, objects may be first seen or recognized
                as members of their basic category, and that only with the aid of additional
                processing can they be identified as members of their superordinate or subor-
                dinate category.

                Development
                We have argued that classification into categories at the basic level is over-
                determined because perception, motor movements, functions, and iconic images
                would all lead to the same level of categorization. Thus basic objects should be
                the first categorizations of concrete objects made by children. In fact, for our
                nine taxonomies, the basic level was the first named. And even when naming
                was controlled, pictures of several basic-level objects were sorted into groups
                ‘‘becausetheywerethe same type of thing’’longbeforesuchatechniqueof
                sorting has become general in children.

                Language
                From all that has been said, we would expect the most useful and, thus, most
                used name for an item to be the basic-level name. In fact, we found that adults
                almost invariably named pictures of the subordinate items of the nine taxono-
                mies at the basic level, although they knew the correct superordinate and sub-
                ordinate names for the objects. On a more speculative level, in the evolution
                of languages, one would expect names to evolve first for basic-level objects,
                spreading both upward and downward as taxonomies increased in depth. Of
                great relevance for this hypothesis are Berlin’s (1972) claims for such a pattern
                for the evolution of plant names, and our own (Rosch et al. 1976a) and New-
                port and Bellugi’s (1978) finding for American Sign Language of the Deaf, that
   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257