Full text: Semantics of ownership

Lockhead, 1980), 74% of the "clusters" contained only one or 
two items. 
However, the major problem with the analysis procedures 
usea to date is that they value differences between 
exemplars within a recall list. They have had the objective 
of identifying semantic associative substructure within a 
recall sequence rather than semantic intension criteria for 
being recalled in the. first place. Such analyses ignore an 
important semantic concern. They detect factors that vary 
within the larger semantic field and that must, therefore, 
not be critical to that field. For example, Coltheart & 
Evans (1981) found that such factors as sea bird vs. land 
ird and predator versus non-predator accounted for large 
proportions of the variance in the free recall lists of 
birds. This means that in the free recall of examples of 
birds, subjects listed both sea birds and land birds, 
predators and non-predators. This in turn means that those 
two factors were not critically relevant in deciding whether 
or not something should be listed as a bird. Thus, although 
they did demonstrate that subjects diftered in the 
substructure of their free recall, they did not explain how 
those differences necessarily and reliably relates to 
semantic intensional criteria. 
Rather than searching for differences among the

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.