Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Consensus Paper: Current Perspectives on Abstract Concepts and Future Research Directions Cover

Consensus Paper: Current Perspectives on Abstract Concepts and Future Research Directions

Open Access
|Oct 2023

References

  1. Adams, F. M., & Osgood, C. E. (1973). A cross-cultural study of the affective meanings of color. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 4(2), 135157. DOI: 10.1177/002202217300400201
  2. Alemanno, F., Houdayer, E., Cursi, M., Velikova, S., Tettamanti, M., Comi, G., Cappa, S. F., & Leocani, L. (2012). Action-related semantic content and negation polarity modulate motor areas during sentence reading: An event-related desynchronization study. Brain Research, 1484, 3949. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.09.030
  3. Allen, R., & Hulme, C. (2006). Speech and language processing mechanisms in verbal serial recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(1), 6488. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.02.002
  4. Altarriba, J., & Bauer, L. M. (2004). The Distinctiveness of Emotion Concepts: A Comparison between Emotion, Abstract, and Concrete Words. The American Journal of Psychology, 117(3), 389410. DOI: 10.2307/4149007
  5. Altarriba, J., Bauer, L. M., & Benvenuto, C. (1999) Concreteness, context availability, and imageability ratings and word associations for abstract, concrete, and emotion words. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31, 578602. DOI: 10.3758/BF03200738
  6. Andres, M., Davare, M., Pesenti, M., Olivier, E., & Seron, X. (2004). Number magnitude and grip aperture interaction. Neuroreport, 15(18), 27732777.
  7. Aravena, P., Delevoye-Turrell, Y., Deprez, V., Cheylus, A., Paulignan, Y., Frak, V., & Nazir, T. (2012). Grip Force Reveals the Context Sensitivity of Language-Induced Motor Activity during “Action Words” Processing: Evidence from Sentential Negation. PLoS ONE, 7(12). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050287
  8. Badets, A., Andres, M., Di Luca, S., & Pesenti, M. (2007). Number magnitude potentiates action judgements. Experimental Brain Research, 180(3), 525534. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-007-0870-y
  9. Banks, B., & Connell, L. (2021). Multidimensional Sensorimotor Grounding of Concrete and Abstract Categories. PsyArXiv. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/y9pa2
  10. Banks, B., & Connell, L. (2022). Category production norms for 117 concrete and abstract categories. Behavior Research Methods. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-021-01787-z
  11. Banks, B., Wingfield, C., & Connell, L. (2021). Linguistic Distributional Knowledge and Sensorimotor Grounding Both Contribute to Semantic Category Production. Cognitive Science, 45(10), e13055. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.13055
  12. Baron-Cohen, S., Ring, H., Moriarty, J., Schmitz, B., Costa, D., & Ell, P. (1994). Recognition of mental state terms. British Journal of Psychiatry, 165(5), 640649. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.165.5.640
  13. Barr, D. J., & Keysar, B. (2007). Perspective taking and the coordination of meaning in language use. In M. J. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 901938). Amsterdam: Academic Press. DOI: 10.1016/B978-012369374-7/50024-9
  14. Barsalou, L. W. (1982). Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts. Memory & Cognition, 10(1), 8293. DOI: 10.3758/BF03197629
  15. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and brain sciences, 22(4), 577660. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X99002149
  16. Barsalou, L. W., Dutriaux, L., & Scheepers, C. (2018). Moving beyond the distinction between concrete and abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 373(1752). DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0144
  17. Barsalou, L., & Wiemer-hastings, K. (2004). Situating Abstract Concepts. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511499968.007
  18. Barsalou, L. W., & Wiemar-Hastings, K. (2005). Situating Abstract Concepts. In D. Pecher & R. A. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding Cognition: The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language, and Thinking (pp. 129163). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511499968.007
  19. Bartoli, E., Tettamanti, A., Farronato, P., Caporizzo, A., Moro, A., Gatti, R., Perani, D., & Tettamanti, M. (2013). The disembodiment effect of negation: Negating action-related sentences attenuates their interference on congruent upper limb movements. Journal of Neurophysiology, 109(7), 17821792. DOI: 10.1152/jn.00894.2012
  20. Beltrán, D., Morera, Y., García-Marco, E., & De Vega, M. (2019). Brain inhibitory mechanisms are involved in the processing of sentential negation, regardless of its content. Evidence from EEG theta and beta rhythms. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(JULY), 114. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01782
  21. Beltrán, D., Muñetón-Ayala, M., & de Vega, M. (2018). Sentential negation modulates inhibition in a stop-signal task. Evidence from behavioral and ERP data. Neuropsychologia, 112(February), 1018. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.03.004
  22. Berlin, B. (1992). Ethnobiological Classification: Principles of Classification of Plants and Animals in Traditional Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. DOI: 10.1515/9781400862597
  23. Bi, Y. (2021). Dual coding of knowledge in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(10), 883895. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.006
  24. Binney, R. J., Hoffman, P., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2016). Mapping the Multiple Graded Contributions of the Anterior Temporal Lobe Representational Hub to Abstract and Social Concepts: Evidence from Distortion-corrected fMRI. Cerebral Cortex, 26(11), 42274241. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhw260
  25. Bolis, D., & Schilbach, L. (2020). ‘I Interact Therefore I Am’: The Self as a Historical Product of Dialectical Attunement. Topoi, 39(3), 521534. DOI: 10.1007/s11245-018-9574-0
  26. Bonnardel, V. (2006). Color naming and categorization in inherited color vision deficiencies. Visual Neuroscience, 23(3–4), 637643. DOI: 10.1017/S0952523806233558
  27. Borghi, A. M. (2019). Linguistic relativity and abstract words. Paradigmi, 37(3), 429448.
  28. Borghi, A. M. (2020). A Future of Words: Language and the Challenge of Abstract Concepts. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 42. DOI: 10.5334/joc.134
  29. Borghi, A. M. (2022). Concepts for which we need others more: The case of abstract concepts. Current Directions in Psychological Science. DOI: 10.1177/09637214221079625
  30. Borghi, A. M., Barca, L., Binkofski, F., Castelfranchi, C., Pezzulo, G., & Tummolini, L. (2019). Words as social tools: Language, sociality and inner grounding in abstract concepts. Physics of Life Reviews, 29, 120153. DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2018.12.001
  31. Borghi, A. M., Binkofski, F., Castelfranchi, C., Cimatti, F., Scorolli, C., & Tummolini, L. (2017). The challenge of abstract concepts. Psychological Bulletin, 143(3), 263292. DOI: 10.1037/bul0000089
  32. Borghi, A. M., Barca, L., Binkofski, F., & Tummolini, L. (2018). Abstract concepts, language and sociality: from acquisition to inner speech. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1752), 20170134. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0134
  33. Borghi, A. M., Fini, C., & Tummolini, L. (2021). Abstract concepts and metacognition: searching for meaning in self and others. In Handbook of Embodied Psychology (pp. 197220). Springer, Cham. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-78471-3_9
  34. Borghi, A. M., Osinska, A., Roepstorff, A., & Raczaszek-Leonardi, J. (in preparation). Concepts in interaction: social engagement and inner experiences. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.
  35. Boroditsky, L. (2018). Language and the construction of time through space. Trends in Neurosciences, 41(10), 651653. DOI: 10.1016/j.tins.2018.08.004
  36. Bottini, R., Morucci, P., D’Urso, A., Collignon, O., & Crepaldi, D. (2021). The concreteness advantage in lexical decision does not depend on perceptual simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. DOI: 10.1037/xge0001090
  37. Boukarras, S., Era, V., Aglioti, S. M., & Candidi, M. (2021). Competence-based social status and implicit preference modulate the ability to coordinate during a joint grasping task. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 110. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-84280-z
  38. Brennan, S. E. (2005). How conversation is shaped by visual and spoken evidence. In J. Trueswell & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Approaches to Studying World-situated Language Use: Bridging the Language-as-product and Language-action Traditions (pp. 95129). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  39. Brysbaert, M., Warriner, A. B., & Kuperman, V. (2014). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 904911. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5
  40. Calzavarini, F. (2017). Inferential and referential lexical semantic competence: A critical review of the supporting evidence. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 44, 163189. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2017.04.002
  41. Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1975). Sentence comprehension: A psycholinguistic processing model of verification. Psychological Review, 82(1), 4573. DOI: 10.1037/h0076248
  42. Çatak, E. N., Açık, A., & Göksun, T. (2018). The relationship between handedness and valence: A gesture study. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(12), 26152626. DOI: 10.1177/1747021817750110
  43. Catricalà, E., Conca, F., Borsa, V. M., Cotelli, M., Manenti, R., Gobbi, E., Binetti, G., Cotta Ramusino, M., Perini, G., Costa, A., Rusconi, M. L., & Cappa, S. F. (2021). Different types of abstract concepts: Evidence from two neurodegenerative patients. Neurocase, 27(3), 270280. DOI: 10.1080/13554794.2021.1931345
  44. Clark, H. H., & Chase, W. G. (1972). On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 472517. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0285(72)90019-9
  45. Clark, H. H. (1976). Semantics and Comprehension. The Hague: Mouton. DOI: 10.1515/9783110871029
  46. Clark, H. H. (1996) Using Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  47. Conca, F., Borsa, V. M., Cappa, S. F., & Catricalà, E. (2021). The multidimensionality of abstract concepts: A systematic review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.05.004
  48. Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2012). Strength of perceptual experience predicts word processing performance better than concreteness or imageability. Cognition, 125(3), 452465. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.010
  49. Connell, L., Lynott, D., & Banks, B. (2018). Interoception: The forgotten modality in perceptual grounding of abstract and concrete concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 373(1752). DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0143
  50. Cree, G. S., & McRae, K. (2003). Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk, cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 132(2), 163201. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.163
  51. Crutch, S. J., & Warrington, E. K. (2005). Abstract and concrete concepts have structurally different representational frameworks. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 128(Pt 3), 615627. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awh349
  52. De Vega, M., Morera, Y., León, I., Beltrán, D., Casado, P., & Martín-Loeches, M. (2016). Sentential negation might share neurophysiological mechanisms with action inhibition. Evidence from frontal theta rhythm. Journal of Neuroscience, 36(22), 60026010. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3736-15.2016
  53. Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371
  54. Desai, R. H., Reilly, M., & van Dam, W. (2018). The multifaceted abstract brain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 373(1752). DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0122
  55. Dolscheid, S., Hunnius, S., Casasanto, D., & Majid, A. (2012). The sound of thickness: Prelinguistic infants’ associations of space and pitch. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 6.
  56. Dolscheid, S., Shayan, S., Majid, A., & Casasanto, D. (2013). The thickness of musical pitch: Psychophysical evidence for linguistic relativity. Psychological Science, 24(5), 613621. DOI: 10.1177/0956797612457374
  57. Dove, G. (2022). Abstract concepts and the embodied mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190061975.001.0001
  58. Dove, G., Barca, L., Tummolini, L., & Borghi, A. M. (2020). Words have a weight: Language as a source of inner grounding and flexibility in abstract concepts. Psychological Research. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-020-01438-6
  59. Dreyer, F. R., & Pulvermüller, F. (2018). Abstract semantics in the motor system? – An event-related fMRI study on passive reading of semantic word categories carrying abstract emotional and mental meaning. Cortex, 100, 5270. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.10.021
  60. Dubossarsky, H., De Deyne, S., & Hills, T. T. (2017). Quantifying the structure of free association networks across the life span. Developmental Psychology, 53(8), 15601570. DOI: 10.1037/dev0000347
  61. Egorova, N., Shtyrov, Y., & Pulvermüller, F. (2013). Early and parallel processing of pragmatic and semantic information in speech acts: Neurophysiological evidence. Frontiers in Neuroengineering, 7(MAR). DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00086
  62. Evans, N., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(5), 429448. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X0999094X
  63. Fargier, R., & Laganaro, M. (2017). Spatio-temporal Dynamics of Referential and Inferential Naming: Different Brain and Cognitive Operations to Lexical Selection. Brain Topography, 30(2), 182197. DOI: 10.1007/s10548-016-0504-4
  64. Fargier, R., Montant, M., & Strijkers, K. (in prep) The production of abstract and concrete words with inferential naming: Effects of context availability and sensitive experience of words on word planning.
  65. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2019). Gender/sex, sexual orientation, and identity are in the body: How did they get there? The Journal of Sex Research, 56(4–5), 529555. DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2019.1581883
  66. Fini, C., Era, V., Cuomo, G., Mazzuca, C., Candidi M., & Borghi, A. M. (in preparation). On-line conversations on abstract concepts increase the psychological closeness between the interlocutors.
  67. Fini, C., Era, V., Da Rold, F., Candidi, M., & Borghi, A. M. (2021), Abstract concepts in interaction: The need of others when guessing abstract concepts, smooths dyadic motor interactions. Royal Society Open Science, 8(7), 201205. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.201205
  68. Fodor, J. A. (1975). The Language of Thought. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.
  69. Foroni, F., & Semin, G. R. (2013). Comprehension of action negation involves inhibitory simulation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7(MAY), 17. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00209
  70. Fugate, J. M. B., & Franco, C. L. (2019). What color is your anger? Assessing color-emotion pairings in English speakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00206
  71. Galantucci, B. (2009). Experimental semiotics: a new approach for studying communication as a form of joint action. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(2), 393410. DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01027.x
  72. Gallese, V. (2007). Before and below ‘theory of mind’: embodied simulation and the neural correlates of social cognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362(1480), 659669. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2006.2002
  73. García-Marco, E., Morera, Y., Beltrán, D., de Vega, M., Herrera, E., Sedeño, L., Ibáñez, A., & García, A. M. (2019). Negation markers inhibit motor routines during typing of manual action verbs. Cognition, 182(June 2018), 286293. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.020
  74. Gentner, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2001). Individuation, relativity, and early word learning. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development, 3, 215256. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669.010
  75. Ghai, S. (2021). It’s time to reimagine sample diversity and retire the WEIRD dichotomy. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(8), 971972. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01175-9
  76. Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (1994). The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  77. Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 9(3), 558565. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196313
  78. Hanley, J. R., Hunt, R. P., Steed, D. A., & Jackman, S. (2013). Concreteness and word production. Memory & Cognition, 41(3), 365377. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0266-5
  79. Harpaintner, M., Sim, E.-J., Trumpp, N. M., Ulrich, M., & Kiefer, M. (2020). The grounding of abstract concepts in the motor and visual system: An fMRI study. Cortex, 124, 122. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2019.10.014
  80. Hartmann, M., Grabherr, L., & Mast, F. W. (2012). Moving along the mental number line: Interactions between whole-body motion and numerical cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(6), 14161427. DOI: 10.1037/a0026706
  81. Heine, B., Kuteva, T., & Bernd, H. (2002). World lexicon of grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511613463
  82. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people are not WEIRD. Nature, 466(7302), 2929. DOI: 10.1038/466029a
  83. Hoffman, P. (2016). The meaning of “life” and other abstract words: Insights from neuropsychology. Journal of Neuropsychology, 10(2), 317343. DOI: 10.1111/jnp.12065
  84. Hoffman, P., McClelland, J. L., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2018). Concepts, control, and context: A connectionist account of normal and disordered semantic cognition. Psychological Review, 125(3), 293328. DOI: 10.1037/rev0000094
  85. Horn, L. (1989). A natural history of negation.
  86. Horn, L. R. (2001). Flaubert triggers, squatitive negation, and other quirks of grammar. Perspectives on Negation and Polarity Items, 173200. DOI: 10.1075/la.40.08hor
  87. Huisman, J. L., Van Hout, R., & Majid, A. (2021). Cross-linguistic constraints and lineage-specific developments in the semantics of cutting and breaking in Japonic and Germanic. Linguistic Typology. DOI: 10.1515/lingty-2021-2090
  88. Indefrey, P. (2011). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components: A critical update. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 255. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00255
  89. Indefrey, P., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2004). The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components. Cognition, 92(1–2), 101144. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2002.06.001
  90. Ingalhalikar, M., Smith, A., Parker, D., Satterthwaite, T. D., Elliott, M. A., Ruparel, K., …, & Verma, R. (2014). Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(2), 823828. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1316909110
  91. Jonauskaite, D., Abu-Akel, A., Dael, N., Oberfeld, D., Abdel-Khalek, A. M., Al-Rasheed, A. S., Antonietti, J.-P., Bogushevskaya, V., Chamseddine, A., Chkonia, E., Corona, V., Fonseca-Pedrero, E., Griber, Y. A., Grimshaw, G., Hasan, A. A., Havelka, J., Hirnstein, M., Karlsson, B. S. A., Laurent, E., … Mohr, C. (2020). Universal patterns in color-emotion associations are further shaped by linguistic and geographic proximity. Psychological Science, 31(10), 12451260. DOI: 10.1177/0956797620948810
  92. Jonauskaite, D., Camenzind, L., Parraga, C. A., Diouf, C. N., Mercapide Ducommun, M., Müller, L., Norberg, M., & Mohr, C. (2021). Colour-emotion associations in individuals with red-green colour blindness. PeerJ, 9, e11180. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.11180
  93. Jonauskaite, D., Parraga, C. A., Quiblier, M., & Mohr, C. (2020). Feeling blue or seeing red? Similar patterns of emotion associations with colour patches and colour terms. I-Perception, 11(1), 124. DOI: 10.1177/2041669520902484
  94. Kaup, B. (2001). Negation and its impact on the accessibility of text information. Memory and Cognition, 29(7), 960967. DOI: 10.3758/BF03195758
  95. Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 10331050. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.012
  96. Kaup, B., & Zwaan, R. A. (2003). Effects of Negation and Situational Presence on the Accessibility of Text Information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 29(3), 439446. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.3.439
  97. Kaya, N., & Epps, H. H. (2004). Relationship between color and emotion: a study of college students. College Student Journal, 38(3), 396406. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-19149-009
  98. Kemmerer, D. (2015). Are the motor features of verb meanings represented in the precentral motor cortices? Yes, but within the context of a flexible, multilevel architecture for conceptual knowledge. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(4), 10681075. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-014-0784-1
  99. Kim, J. S., Aheimer, B., Montané Manrara, V., & Bedny, M. (2021). Shared understanding of color among sighted and blind adults. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(33), e2020192118. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2020192118
  100. Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  101. Kousta, S.-T., Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Andrews, M., & Del Campo, E. (2011). The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140(1), 1434. DOI: 10.1037/a0021446
  102. Krethlow, G., Fargier, R., & Laganaro, M. (2020). Age-Specific Effects of Lexical-Semantic Networks on Word Production. Cognitive Science, 44(11), e12915. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12915
  103. Kuperberg, G. R., McGuire, P. K., Bullmore, E. T., Brammer, M. J., Rabe-Hesketh, S., Wright, I. C., Lythgoe, D. J., Williams, S. C. R., & David, A. S. (2000). Common and distinct neural substrates for pragmatic, semantic, and syntactic processing of spoken sentences: An fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2), 321341. DOI: 10.1162/089892900562138
  104. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  105. Lebois, L. A. M., Wilson-Mendenhall, C. D., & Barsalou, L. W. (2015). Are Automatic Conceptual Cores the Gold Standard of Semantic Processing? The Context-Dependence of Spatial Meaning in Grounded Congruency Effects. Cognitive Science, 39(8), 17641801. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12174
  106. Lindemann, O., Abolafia, J. M., Girardi, G., & Bekkering, H. (2007). Getting a grip on numbers: Numerical magnitude priming in object grasping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(6), 14001409. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.33.6.1400
  107. Linhares, J. M. M., Pinto, P. D., & Nascimento, S. M. C. (2008). The number of discernible colors perceived by dichromats in natural scenes and the effects of colored lenses. Visual Neuroscience, 25(3), 493499. DOI: 10.1017/S0952523808080620
  108. Liu, B., Gu, B., Beltrán, D., Wang, H., & de Vega, M. (2020). Presetting an inhibitory state modifies the neural processing of negated action sentences. An ERP study. Brain and Cognition, 143(February), 105598. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandc.2020.105598
  109. Liu, B., Wang, H., Beltrán, D., Gu, B., Liang, T., Wang, X., & de Vega, M. (2019). The generalizability of inhibition-related processes in the comprehension of linguistic negation. ERP evidence from the Mandarin language. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 111. DOI: 10.1080/23273798.2019.1662460
  110. Liuzza, M. T., Candidi, M., & Aglioti, S. M. (2011). Do not resonate with actions: Sentence polarity modulates cortico-spinal excitability during action-related sentence reading. PLoS ONE, 6(2), 3841. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016855
  111. Logan, G. D., Cowan, W. B., & Davis, K. A. (1984). On the ability to inhibit simple and choice reaction time responses: A model and a method. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10(2), 276291. DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.10.2.276
  112. Lupyan, G., & Dale, R. (2010) Language Structure Is Partly Determined by Social Structure. PLoS ONE, 5(1), e8559. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008559
  113. Lupyan, G., & Winter, B. (2018). Language is more abstract than you think, or, why aren’t languages more iconic? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 373(1752). DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0137
  114. Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2013). Modality exclusivity norms for 400 nouns: The relationship between perceptual experience and surface word form. Behavior Research Methods, 45(2), 516526. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-012-0267-0
  115. Lynott, D., Connell, L., Brysbaert, M., Brand, J., & Carney, J. (2020). The Lancaster Sensorimotor Norms: Multidimensional measures of perceptual and action strength for 40,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 52(3), 12711291. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-019-01316-z
  116. MacDonald, M. C., & Just, M. A. (1989). Changes in Activation Levels With Negation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(4), 633642. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.15.4.633
  117. Majid, A., Boster, J. S., & Bowerman, M. (2008). The cross-linguistic categorization of everyday events: A study of cutting and breaking. Cognition, 109(2), 235250. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.08.009
  118. Majid, A., Burenhult, N., Stensmyr, M., De Valk, J., & Hansson, B. S. (2018). Olfactory language and abstraction across cultures. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1752), 20170139. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0139
  119. Majid, A., Jordan, F., & Dunn, M. (2015). Semantic systems in closely related languages. Language Sciences, 49, 118. DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2014.11.002
  120. Majid, A., & Kruspe, N. (2018). Hunter-gatherer olfaction is special. Current Biology, 28(3), 409413. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.12.014
  121. Majid, A., Roberts, S. G., Cilissen, L., Emmorey, K., Nicodemus, B., O’grady, L., … and Levinson, S. C. (2018). Differential coding of perception in the world’s languages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), 1136911376. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1720419115
  122. Malt, B., Wolff, P., & Wolff, P. M. (Eds.). (2010). Words and the mind: How words capture human experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195311129.001.0001
  123. Malt, B. C., & Majid, A. (2013). How thought is mapped into words. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4(6), 583597. DOI: 10.1002/wcs.1251
  124. Marconi, D. (1997). Lexical Competence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  125. Marconi, D., Manenti, R., Catricalà, E., Della Rosa, P. A., Siri, S., & Cappa, S. F. (2013). The neural substrates of inferential and referential semantic processing. Cortex; a Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 49(8), 20552066. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.08.001
  126. Mazzuca, C., Borghi, A. M., van Putten, S., Lugli, L., Nicoletti, R., & Majid, A. (2020). Gender at the interface of culture and language: Conceptual variation between Italian, Dutch, and English. Preprint at link: https://osf.io/ugv43
  127. Mazzuca, C., Falcinelli, I., Michalland, A.-H., Tummolini, L., & Borghi, A. M. (2021). Differences and similarities in the conceptualization of COVID-19 and other diseases in the first Italian lockdown. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 18303. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-97805-3
  128. Mazzuca, C., Falcinelli, I., Michalland, A.-H., Tummolini, L., & Borghi, A. M. (2022). Bodily, emotional, and public sphere at the time of COVID-19. An investigation on concrete and abstract concepts. Psychological Research. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-021-01633-z
  129. Mazzuca, C., Majid, A., Lugli, L., Nicoletti, R., & Borghi, A. M. (2020). Gender is a multifaceted concept: evidence that specific life experiences differentially shape the concept of gender. Language and Cognition, 12(4), 649678. DOI: 10.1017/langcog.2020.15
  130. Mazzuca, C., & Santarelli, M. (2022). Making it abstract, making it contestable: Politicization at the intersection of political and cognitive science. In press in Review of Philosophy and Psychology. DOI: 10.1007/s13164-022-00640-2
  131. Meier, B. P., & Robinson, M. D. (2004). Why the sunny side is up: Association between affect and vertical position. Psychological Science, 15(4), 243247. DOI: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00659.x
  132. Moffat, M., Siakaluk, P. D., Sidhu, D. M., et al. (2015) Situated conceptualization and semantic processing: effects of emotional experience and context availability in semantic categorization and naming tasks. Psychon Bull Rev, 22, 408419. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-014-0696-0
  133. Montalti, M., Calbi, M., Cuccio, V., Umiltà, M. A., & Gallese, V. (2021a). Is motor inhibition involved in the processing of sentential negation? An assessment via the Stop-Signal Task. Psychological Research, April. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-021-01512-7
  134. Montalti, M., Calbi, M., Umiltà, M. A., Gallese, V., & Cuccio, V. (2021b). The role of motor inhibition in implicit negation processing: two Go/NoGo behavioral studies. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/s7p5t
  135. Moody, C. L., & Gennari, S. P. (2010). Effects of implied physical effort in sensory-motor and pre-frontal cortex during language comprehension. NeuroImage, 49(1), 782793. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.07.065
  136. Moreau, Q., Candidi, M., Era, V., Tieri, G., & Aglioti, S. M. (2020). Midline frontal and occipito-temporal activity during error monitoring in dyadic motor interactions. Cortex, 127, 131149. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2020.01.020
  137. Moreira, H., Lillo, J., & Álvaro, L. (2021). “Red-Green” or “Brown-Green” dichromats? The accuracy of dichromat basic color terms metacognition supports denomination change. Frontiers in Psychology, 12(March). DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.624792
  138. Moseley, R. L., Shtyrov, Y., Mohr, B., Lombardo, M. V., Baron-Cohen, S., & Pulvermüller, F. (2015). Lost for emotion words: What motor and limbic brain activity reveals about autism and semantic theory. NeuroImage, 104, 413422. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.046
  139. Muraki, E. J., Sidhu, D. M., & Pexman, P. M. (2020). Heterogenous abstract concepts: Is “ponder” different from “dissolve”? Psychological Research, 117. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-020-01398-x
  140. Newcombe, P. I., Campbell, C., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2012). Effects of emotional and sensorimotor knowledge in semantic processing of concrete and abstract nouns. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, Article 275. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00275
  141. Nozari, N., & Pinet, S. (2020). A critical review of the behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological studies of co-activation of representations during word production. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 53, 100875. DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2019.100875
  142. Ostarek, M., & Huettig, F. (2017). A task-dependent causal role for low-level visual processes in spoken word comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(8), 12151224. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000375
  143. Ou, L.-C., Yuan, Y., Sato, T., Lee, W.-Y., Szabó, F., Sueeprasan, S., & Huertas, R. (2018). Universal models of colour emotion and colour harmony. Color Research & Application, 43(5), 736748. DOI: 10.1002/col.22243
  144. Papeo, L., Hochmann, J. R., & Battelli, L. (2016). The default computation of negated meanings. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01016
  145. Parsons, P. (2018). Conceptual Metaphor Theory as a foundation for communicative visualization design.
  146. Pazda, A. D., & Thorstenson, C. A. (2019). Color intensity increases perceived extraversion and openness for zero-acquaintance judgments. Personality and Individual Differences, 147(April), 118127. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.022
  147. Peer, E., Brandimarte, L., Samat, S., & Acquisti, A. (2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153163. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006
  148. Pexman, P. M., Muraki, E., Sidhu, D. M., Siakaluk, P. D., & Yap, M. J. (2019). Quantifying sensorimotor experience: Body–object interaction ratings for more than 9,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 51(2), 453466. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-018-1171-z
  149. Pexman, P. M., & Yap, M. J. (2018). Individual differences in semantic processing: Insights from the Calgary semantic decision project. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(7), 10911112. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000499
  150. Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(2), 169190. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X04000056
  151. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2021). Understanding Dialogue: Language Use and Social Interaction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781108610728
  152. Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct. New York: Harper Collins. DOI: 10.1037/e412952005-009
  153. Prinz, J. J. (2014). Beyond human nature: How culture and experience shape the human mind. WW Norton & Company.
  154. Race, D. S., Tsapkini, K., Crinion, J., Newhart, M., Davis, C., Gomez, Y., Hillis, A. E., & Faria, A. V. (2013). An area essential for linking word meanings to word forms: Evidence from primary progressive aphasia. Brain and Language, 127(2), 167176. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2013.09.004
  155. Recchia, G., & Jones, M. (2012). The semantic richness of abstract concepts. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00315. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00315
  156. Reggin, L. D., Muraki, E. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2021). Development of Abstract Word Knowledge. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 2115. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.686478
  157. Regier, T., Kay P., & Khetarpal N. (2007). Color naming reflects optimal partitions of color space. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 14361441. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0610341104
  158. Rocca, R., Coventry, K. R., Tylén, K., Staib, M., Lund, T. E., & Wallentin, M. (2020). Language beyond the language system: Dorsal visuospatial pathways support processing of demonstratives and spatial language during naturalistic fast fMRI. NeuroImage, 216, 116128. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116128
  159. Rueschemeyer, S. A., van, R. D., Lindemann, O., Willems, R. M., & Bekkering, H. (2010). The function of words: Distinct neural correlates for words denoting differently manipulable objects. J.Cogn Neurosci., 22(8), 18441851. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21310
  160. Saysani, A., Corballis, M. C., & Corballis, P. M. (2018). Colour envisioned: concepts of colour in the blind and sighted. Visual Cognition, 26(5), 382392. DOI: 10.1080/13506285.2018.1465148
  161. Saysani, A., Corballis, M. C., & Corballis, P. M. (2021). Seeing colour through language: Colour knowledge in the blind and sighted. Visual Cognition, 29(1), 6371. DOI: 10.1080/13506285.2020.1866726
  162. Schudson, Z. C., Beischel, W. J., & van Anders, S. M. (2019). Individual variation in gender/sex category definitions. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 6(4), 448. DOI: 10.1037/sgd0000346
  163. Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Stowe, R. W. (1989). Context availability and the processing of abstract and concrete words in sentences. Reading Research Quarterly, 114126. DOI: 10.2307/748013
  164. Shea, N. (2018). Metacognition and abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1752). DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0133
  165. Shepard, R. N., & Cooper, L. A. (1992). Representation of colors in the blind, color-blind, and normally sighted. Psychological Science, 3(2), 97104. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00006.x
  166. Siakaluk, P. D., Newcombe, P. I., Duffels, B., Li, E., Sidhu, D. M., Yap, M. J., & Pexman, P. M. (2016). Effects of emotional experience in lexical decision. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1157. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01157
  167. Speed, L. J., & Brysbaert, M. (2021). Dutch sensory modality norms. Behavior Research Methods. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-021-01656-9
  168. Tettamanti, M., Manenti, R., Della Rosa, P. A., Falini, A., Perani, D., Cappa, S. F., & Moro, A. (2008). Negation in the brain: Modulating action representations. NeuroImage, 43(2), 358367. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.08.004
  169. Thompson, B., Roberts, S. G., & Lupyan, G. (2020). Cultural influences on word meanings revealed through large-scale semantic alignment. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(10), 10291038. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-020-0924-8
  170. Tillotson, S. M., Siakaluk, P. D., & Pexman, P. M. (2008). Body-object interaction ratings for 1,618 monosyllabic nouns. Behavior Research Methods, 40(4), 10751078. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.40.4.1075
  171. Tomasello, M. (2014). A Natural History of Human Thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI: 10.4159/9780674726369
  172. Tomasino, B., & Rumiati, R. I. (2013). Introducing the special topic “The when and why of sensorimotor processes in conceptual knowledge and abstract concepts.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 498. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00498
  173. Tomasino, B., Weiss, P. H., & Fink, G. R. (2010). To move or not to move: Imperatives modulate action-related verb processing in the motor system. Neuroscience, 169(1), 246258. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.04.039
  174. Trebuchon-Da Fonseca, A., Guedj, E., Alario, F.-X., Laguitton, V., Mundler, O., Chauvel, P., & Liegeois-Chauvel, C. (2009). Brain regions underlying word finding difficulties in temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 132(Pt 10), 27722784. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awp083
  175. Tregillus, K. E. M., Isherwood, Z. J., Vanston, J. E., Engel, S. A., MacLeod, D. I. A., Kuriki, I., & Webster, M. A. (2021). Color compensation in anomalous trichromats assessed with fMRI. Current Biology, 31(5), 936942.e4. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.11.039
  176. van Dam, W. O., van Dijk, M., Bekkering, H., & Rueschemeyer, S.-A. (2011). Flexibility in embodied lexical-semantic representations. Human Brain Mapping. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.21365
  177. Vergallito, A., Petilli, M. A., & Marelli, M. (2020). Perceptual modality norms for 1,121 Italian words: A comparison with concreteness and imageability scores and an analysis of their impact in word processing tasks. Behavior Research Methods, 52(4), 15991616. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-019-01337-8
  178. Vigliocco, G., Meteyard, L., Andrews, M., & Kousta, S. (2009). Toward a theory of semantic representation. Language and Cognition, 1(2), 219247. DOI: 10.1515/LANGCOG.2009.011
  179. Villani, C., Lugli, L., Liuzza, M. T., & Borghi, A. M. (2019). Varieties of abstract concepts and their multiple dimensions. Language and Cognition, 11(3), 403430. DOI: 10.1017/langcog.2019.23
  180. Villani, C., Lugli, L., Liuzza, M. T., Nicoletti, R., & Borghi, A. M. (2021). Sensorimotor and interoceptive dimensions in concrete and abstract concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 116, 104173. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2020.104173
  181. Villani, C., Orsoni, M., Lugli, L., Benassi, M., & Borghi, A.M. (2022). Abstract and concrete concepts in conversation. DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/kv6dp
  182. Vinson, D. P., & Vigliocco, G. (2008). Semantic feature production norms for a large set of objects and events. Behavior Research Methods, 40(1), 183190. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.40.1.183
  183. Vitale, F., Monti, I., Padrón, I., Avenanti, A., & de Vega, M. (2022). The neural inhibition network is causally involved in the disembodiment effect of linguistic negation. Cortex, 7. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2021.11.015
  184. Vukovic, N., Feurra, M., Shpektor, A., Myachykov, A., & Shtyrov, Y. (2017). Primary motor cortex functionally contributes to language comprehension: An online rTMS study. Neuropsychologia, 96, 222229. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.01.025
  185. Walker, E. J., Bergen, B. K., & Núñez, R. (2017). The spatial alignment of time: Differences in alignment of deictic and sequence time along the sagittal and lateral axes. Acta Psychologica, 175, 1320. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.02.001
  186. Walker, E. J., & Cooperrider, K. (2016). The continuity of metaphor: Evidence from temporal gestures. Cognitive Science, 40(2), 481495. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12254
  187. Wang, X., & Bi, Y. (2021). Idiosyncratic Tower of Babel: Individual Differences in Word-Meaning Representation Increase as Word Abstractness Increases. Psychological Science, 32(10), 16171635. DOI: 10.1177/09567976211003877
  188. Wauters, L. N., Tellings, A. E., Van Bon, W. H., & Van Haaften, A. W. (2003). Mode of acquisition of word meanings: The viability of a theoretical construct. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24(3), 385406. DOI: 10.1017/S0142716403000201
  189. Wierzbicka, A. (2014). Imprisoned in English: The Hazards of English as a Default Language. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199321490.001.0001
  190. Willems, R. M., & Casasanto, D. (2011). Flexibility in embodied language understanding. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 116. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00116
  191. Winter, B., & Matlock, T. (2017). Primary metaphors are both cultural and embodied. In Metaphor: Embodied Cognition and Discourse (pp. 99116). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/9781108182324.007
  192. Woodin, G., & Winter, B. (2018). Placing abstract concepts in space: Quantity, time and emotional valence. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02169
  193. Woodin, G., Winter, B., & Padilla, L. (2022). Conceptual metaphor and graphical convention influence the interpretation of line graphs. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 28(2), 12091221. DOI: 10.1109/TVCG.2021.3088343
  194. Woodin, G., Winter, B., Perlman, M., Littlemore, J., & Matlock, T. (2020). ‘Tiny numbers’ are actually tiny: Evidence from gestures in the TV News Archive. PLOS ONE, 15(11), e0242142. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242142
  195. Wulff, D. U., De Deyne, S., Jones, M. N., Mata, R., & Aging Lexicon Consortium. (2019). New Perspectives on the Aging Lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(8), 686698. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2019.05.003
  196. Yee, E. (2017). Fluid semantics: Semantic knowledge is experience-based and dynamic. In The Speech Processing Lexicon(pp. 236255). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110422658-012/pdf. DOI: 10.1515/9783110422658-012
  197. Yee, E., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2016). Putting concepts into context. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 10151027. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-015-0948-7
  198. Yu, L., Westland, S., Li, Z., Pan, Q., Shin, M. J., & Won, S. (2018). The role of individual colour preferences in consumer purchase decisions. Color Research and Application, 43(2), 258267. DOI: 10.1002/col.22180
  199. Zabihzadeh, A., Mazaheri, M. A., Hatami, J., Nikfarjam, M. R., Panaghi, L., & Davoodi, T. (2019). Cultural differences in conceptual representation of “Privacy”: A comparison between Iran and the United States. The Journal of Social Psychology, 159(4), 357370. DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2018.1493676
  200. Zahn, R., Moll, J., Iyengar, V., Huey, E. D., Tierney, M., Krueger, F., & Grafman, J. (2009). Social conceptual impairments in frontotemporal lobar degeneration with right anterior temporal hypometabolism. Brain, 132(3), 604616. DOI: 10.1093/brain/awn343
  201. Zahn, R., Moll, J., Krueger, F., Huey, E. D., Garrido, G., & Grafman, J. (2007). Social concepts are represented in the superior anterior temporal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(15), 64306435. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0607061104
  202. Zdrazilova, L., Sidhu, D. M., & Pexman, P. M. (2018). Communicating abstract meaning: Concepts revealed in words and gestures. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1752). DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0138
  203. Zhang, T., & Han, B. (2014). Experience reverses the red effect among Chinese stockbrokers. PLoS ONE, 9(2), e89193. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089193
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.238 | Journal eISSN: 2514-4820
Language: English
Submitted on: Feb 18, 2022
Accepted on: Aug 12, 2022
Published on: Oct 10, 2023
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2023 Briony Banks, Anna M. Borghi, Raphaël Fargier, Chiara Fini, Domicele Jonauskaite, Claudia Mazzuca, Martina Montalti, Caterina Villani, Greg Woodin, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.