References

Muhammad Ali Khalidi

Abramowitz, J. (2018). Presidential address: Are the obsessive-compulsive related disorders related to obsessive-compulsive disorder? A critical look at DSM-5’s new category. Behavior Therapy, 49(1), 1–11.Google Scholar

Addis, D. R. (2018). Are episodic memories special? On the sameness of remembered and imagined event simulation. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 48(2–3), 64–88.Google Scholar

Aggleton, J. P., & Brown, M. W. (2006). Interleaving brain systems for episodic and recognition memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(10), 455–463.Google Scholar

Aizawa, K. (2017). Multiple realization, autonomy, and integration. In Kaplan, D. M. (ed.), Explanation and integration in mind and brain science (pp. 215–235). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Aizawa, K., & Gillett, C. (2009). Levels, individual variation and massive multiple realization in neurobiology. In Bickle, J. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy and neuroscience (pp. 539–582). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5®). American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar

Amundson, R., & Lauder, G. V. (1994). Function without purpose: The uses of causal role function in evolutionary biology. Biology and Philosophy, 9(4), 443–469.Google Scholar

Anderson, M. L. (2010). Neural reuse: A fundamental organizational principle of the brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(4), 245–266.Google Scholar

Anderson, M. L. (2014). After phrenology: Neural reuse and the interactive brain. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, M. L. (2015). Mining the brain for a new taxonomy of the mind. Philosophy Compass, 10(1), 68–77.Google Scholar

Andreasen, N. C. (1997). Linking mind and brain in the study of mental illnesses: a project for a scientific psychopathology. Science, 275(5306), 1586–1593.Google Scholar

Antony, L. (2016). Bias: Friend or foe? Reflections on Saulish skepticism. In Brownstein, M. and Saul, J. (eds.), Implicit bias and philosophy, volume 1: Metaphysics and epistemology (pp. 157–191). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ariew, A. (1999). Innateness is canalization: In defense of a developmental account of innateness. In Hardcastle, V. G. (ed.), Where biology meets psychology: Philosophical essays (pp. 117–138). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Ariew, A. (2007). Innateness. In Matthen, M. and Stephens, C. (eds.), Philosophy of biology (Handbook of the philosophy of science vol. 3) (pp. 567–584). Elsevier.Google Scholar

Armstrong, S. L., Gleitman, L. R., & Gleitman, H. (1983). What some concepts might not be. Cognition, 13(3), 263–308.Google Scholar

Ásta, (published under Sveinsdóttir, Á. K.). (2013). The social construction of human kinds. Hypatia, 28(4), 716–732.Google Scholar

Athanasopoulos, P., & Casaponsa, A. (2020). The Whorfian brain: Neuroscientific approaches to linguistic relativity. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 37(5–6), 393–412.Google Scholar

Atkinson, A. P., & Wheeler, M. (2004). The grain of domains: The evolutionary-psychological case against domain-general cognition. Mind & Language, 19(2), 147–176.Google Scholar

Baddeley, A. (2001). The concept of episodic memory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 356(1413), 1345–1350.Google Scholar

Baker, L. R. (2011). Does naturalism rest on a mistake? American Philosophical Quarterly, 48(2), 161–173.Google Scholar

Baker, M. C. (2001). The atoms of language: The mind’s hidden rules of grammar. Basic Books.Google Scholar

Baldock, E., Anson, M., & Veale, D. (2012). The stopping criteria for mirror-gazing in body dysmorphic disorder. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(3), 323–344.Google Scholar

Baluška, F., & Levin, M. (2016). On having no head: Cognition throughout biological systems. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 902.Google Scholar

Barclay, J. R., Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., McCarrell, N. S., & Nitsch, K. E. (1974). Comprehension and semantic flexibility. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13(4), 471–481.Google Scholar

Baron, J. (2004). Normative models of judgment and decision making. In Koehler, D. and Harvey, N. (eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 19–36). Blackwell.Google Scholar

Barrett, H. C. (2018). Modularity and domain specificity. In Callan, H. (ed.), The international encyclopedia of anthropology (pp. 1–10). Wiley.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. (1982). Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts. Memory & Cognition, 10(1), 82–93.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. (1983). Ad hoc categories. Memory & Cognition, 11(3), 211–227.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. (1993). Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In Collins, A. C., Gathercole, S. E., and Conway, M. A. (eds.), Theories of memory, (pp. 29–101). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. (2016). On staying grounded and avoiding quixotic dead ends. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1122–1142.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., Dutriaux, L., & Scheepers, C. (2018). Moving beyond the distinction between concrete and abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 373(1752), 20170144.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 84–91.Google Scholar

Bascandziev, I., Tardiff, N., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (2018). The role of domain-general cognitive resources in children’s construction of a vitalist theory of biology. Cognitive Psychology, 104, 1–28.Google Scholar

Bates, E. (2001). Modularity, domain specificity and the development of language. In Bechtel, W. et al. (eds.), Philosophy and the neurosciences: A reader (pp. 134–151). Blackwell.Google Scholar

Bateson, P. & Mameli, M. (2007). The innate and the acquired: Useful clusters or a residual distinction from folk biology? Developmental Psychobiology, 49(8), 818–831.Google Scholar

Beck, J. (2018). Marking the perception–cognition boundary: The criterion of stimulus-dependence. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 96(2), 319–334.Google Scholar

Bédécarrats, A. & Glanzman, D. L. (2018). Regulation of memory storage through epigenetic alterations: A new role for RNA. The Biochemist, 40(5), 12–15.Google Scholar

Beilharz, F. L., Atkins, K. J., Duncum, A. J., & Mundy, M. E. (2016). Altering visual perception abnormalities: A marker for body image concern. PloS ONE, 11(3), Article e0151933.Google Scholar

Beilharz, F., Castle, D. J., Grace, S., & Rossell, S. L. (2017). A systematic review of visual processing and associated treatments in body dysmorphic disorder. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 136(1), 16–36.Google Scholar

Binder, J. R. (2016). In defense of abstract conceptual representations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 1096–1108.Google Scholar

Blanco, F. (2017). Cognitive bias. In Vonk, J. and Shackelford, T. (eds.), Encyclopedia of animal cognition and behavior. Springer.Google Scholar

Block, N. (1986). Advertisement for a semantics for psychology. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 10(1), 615–678.Google Scholar

Block, N. (1987). Functional role and truth conditions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 61, 157–181.Google Scholar

Block, N. (2003). Do causal powers drain away? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 67(1), 133–150.Google Scholar

Bloom, P., & Keil, F. (2001). Thinking through language. Mind & Language, 16(4), 351–367.Google Scholar

Bohnemeyer, J. (2020). Linguistic relativity: From Whorf to now. In Gutzmann, D., Matthewson, L., Meier, C., Rullmann, H., and Zimmermann, T. (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to semantics. Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar

Bohon, C., Hembacher, E., Moller, H., Moody, T., & Feusner, J. (2012). Nonlinear relationships between anxiety and visual processing of own and others’ faces in body dysmorphic disorder. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 204(2–3), 132–139.Google Scholar

Bonnet, L., Comte, A., Tatu, L., Millot, J. L., Moulin, T, & de Bustos, E. M. (2015). The role of the amygdala in the perception of positive emotions: An “intensity detector.” Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 178.Google Scholar

Boroditsky, L. (2012). How the languages we speak shape the ways we think: The FAQs. In Spivey, M. J., Joanisse, M., and McRae, K. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 615–632). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Boroditsky, L., Schmidt, L. A., & Phillips, W. (2003). Sex, syntax, and semantics. In Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 61–79). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Boyd, R. (1989). What realism implies and what it does not. Dialectica, 43(1–2), 5–29.Google Scholar

Boyd, R. (1991). Realism, anti-foundationalism and the enthusiasm for natural kinds. Philosophical Studies, 61(1–2) 127–148.Google Scholar

Boyd, R. (2000). Kinds as the “workmanship of men”: Realism, constructivism, and natural kinds. In Nida-Rümelin, J. (ed.), Rationality, realism, revision, (pp. 52–89). Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Boyer, P. (2008). Evolutionary economics of mental time travel? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(6), 219–224.Google Scholar

Boyer, P. (2009). What are memories for? Functions of recall in cognition and culture. In Boyer, P. and Wertsch, J. V. (eds.), Memory in mind and culture (pp. 3–28). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Boyer, P., & Barrett, H. C. (2005). Domain specificity and intuitive ontology. In Buss, D. (ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 96–118). Wiley.Google Scholar

Boyle, A. (2020). The impure phenomenology of episodic memory. Mind & Language, 35(5), 641–660.Google Scholar

Brigandt, I., & Griffiths, P. E. (2007). The importance of homology for biology and philosophy. Biology & Philosophy, 22(5), 633–641.Google Scholar

Bronstein, M. V., & Cannon, T. D. (2017). Bias against disconfirmatory evidence in a large nonclinical sample: Associations with schizotypy and delusional beliefs. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 8(3), 288–302.Google Scholar

Buhlmann, U., Etcoff, N. L., & Wilhelm, S. (2006). Emotion recognition bias for contempt and anger in body dysmorphic disorder. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 40(2), 105–111.Google Scholar

Buhlmann, U., Wacker, R., & Dziobek, I. (2015). Inferring other people’s states of mind: Comparison across social anxiety, body dysmorphic, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 34, 107–113.Google Scholar

Buhlmann, U., Winter, A., & Kathmann, N. (2013). Emotion recognition in body dysmorphic disorder: Application of the reading of the mind in eyes task. Body Image, 10(2), 247–250.Google Scholar

Burge, T. (1986). Individualism and psychology. Philosophical Review, 95(1), 3–45.Google Scholar

Burge, T. (2010). Origins of objectivity. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Camp, E. (2009). Putting thoughts to work: Concepts, systematicity, and stimulus-independence. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 78(2), 275–311.Google Scholar

Caramazza, A., & Mahon, B. Z. (2003). The organization of conceptual knowledge: The evidence from category-specific semantic deficits. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(8), 354–361.Google Scholar

Caramazza, A., & Shelton, J. R. (1998). Domain-specific knowledge systems in the brain: The animate-inanimate distinction. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(1), 1–34.Google Scholar

Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carey, S. (1988). Conceptual differences between children and adults. Mind and Language, 3(3), 167–181.Google Scholar

Carey, S. (2009) The origin of concepts. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Carey, S., & Spelke, E. (1994). Domain-specific knowledge and conceptual change. In Hirschfeld, L. A. and Gelman, S. A. (eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 169–200). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carroll, J. B. (Ed.) (1964). Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carruthers, P. (2002). The cognitive functions of language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(6), 657–674.Google Scholar

Carruthers, P. (2012). Language in cognition. In Margolis, E., Samuels, R., and Stich, S. P. (eds.), Oxford handbook of philosophy of cognitive science (pp. 382–401). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Casasanto, D. (2008). Who’s afraid of the big bad Whorf? Crosslinguistic differences in temporal language and thought. Language Learning, 58(Suppl.1), 63–79.Google Scholar

Casasanto, D. (2016). Linguistic relativity. In Reimer, N. (ed.), Routledge handbook of semantics (pp. 158–174). Routledge.Google Scholar

Casasanto, D., & Lupyan, G. (2015). All concepts are ad hoc concepts. In Margolis, E. and Laurence, S. (eds.), The conceptual mind (pp. 543–566). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Ceschi, A., Costantini, A., Sartori, R., Weller, J., & Di Fabio, A. (2019). Dimensions of decision-making: An evidence-based classification of heuristics and biases. Personality and Individual Differences, 146, 188–200.Google Scholar

Chalmers, D. (2008). Foreword. In Clark, A. (ed.), Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action and cognitive extension (pp. ix–xxix). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Charland, L. C. (2002). The natural kind status of emotion. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 53(4), 511–537.Google Scholar

Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1985). Social and non-social knowledge in vervet monkeys. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 308(1135), 187–201.Google Scholar

Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (1990). How monkeys see the world: Inside the mind of another species. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Cheng, S., & Werning, M. (2016). What is episodic memory if it is a natural kind? Synthese, 193, 1345–1385.Google Scholar

Cheng, S., Werning, M., & Suddendorf, T. (2016). Dissociating memory traces and scenario construction in mental time travel. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 60, 82–89.Google Scholar

Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121–152.Google Scholar

Chiandetti, C., & Vallortigara, G. (2008). Is there an innate geometric module? Effects of experience with angular geometric cues on spatial re-orientation based on the shape of the environment. Animal Cognition, 11(1), 139–146.Google Scholar

Child, W. (2001). Triangulation: Davidson, realism and natural kinds. Dialectica, 55(1), 29–49.Google Scholar

Churchland, P. M. (1982). Is “thinker” a natural kind? Dialogue, 21(2), 223–238.Google Scholar

Cibelli, E., Xu, Y., Austerweil, J. L., Griffiths, T. L., & Regier, T. (2016). The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and probabilistic inference: Evidence from the domain of color. PLoS ONE 11(7), e0158725.Google Scholar

Cimpian, A., & Salomon, E. (2014). The inherence heuristic: An intuitive means of making sense of the world, and a potential precursor to psychological essentialism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37(5), 461–480.Google Scholar

Clark, A. (1998). Magic words: How language augments human computation. In Carruthers, P. and Boucher, J. (eds.), Language and thought: Interdisciplinary themes (pp. 162–183). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Clark, H. (1996). Communities, commonalities, and communication. In Gumperz, J. J. and Levinson, S. C. (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 324–355). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Close, J., Hahn, U., Hodgetts, C. J., & Pothos, E. M. (2010). Rules and similarity in adult concept learning. In Mareschal, D., Quinn, P. C., and Lea, S. E. G. (eds.), The making of human concepts (pp. 29–51). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Collins, J. (2005). Nativism: In defense of a biological understanding. Philosophical Psychology, 18(2), 157–177.Google Scholar

Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2014). Principles of representation: Why you can’t represent the same concept twice. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6(3), 390–406.Google Scholar

Corns, J. (2012). Pain is not a natural kind (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). City University of New York.Google Scholar

Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1994). Origins of domain specificity: The evolution of functional organization. In Hirschfeld, L. A. and Gelman, S. A. (eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 84–116). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cowie, F. (1999). What’s within? Nativism reconsidered. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Craver, C. F. (2007). Explaining the brain: Mechanisms and the mosaic unity of neuroscience. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Craver, C. F. (2009). Mechanisms and natural kinds. Philosophical Psychology, 22(5), 575–594.Google Scholar

Craver, C. F. (2013). Functions and mechanisms: A perspectivalist view. In Huneman, P. (ed.), Functions: Selection and mechanisms (pp. 133–158). Springer.Google Scholar

Craver, C. F. (2020). Remembering: Epistemic and empirical. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 11(2), 261–281.Google Scholar

Crick, F., & Koch, C. (1990). Towards a neurobiological theory of consciousness. Seminars in Neuroscience, 2, 263–275.Google Scholar

Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281.Google Scholar

Csibra, G. (2007). Teachers in the wild. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(3), 95–96.Google Scholar

Darden, L., & Maull, N. (1977). Interfield theories. Philosophy of Science, 44(1), 43–64.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. (1973). Radical interpretation. Dialectica, 27(3–4), 313–328.Google Scholar

Davidson, D. (1974). On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 47, 5–20Google Scholar

De Brigard, F. (2014). Is memory for remembering? Recollection as a form of episodic hypothetical thinking. Synthese, 191(2), 155–185.Google Scholar

De Brigard, F., Addis, D. R., Ford, J. H., Schacter, D. L., & Giovanello, K. S. (2013). Remembering what could have happened: Neural correlates of episodic counterfactual thinking. Neuropsychologia, 51(12), 2401–2414.Google Scholar

Debus, D. (2016). Imagination and memory. In Kind, A. (ed.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of imagination (pp. 135–148). Routledge.Google Scholar

De Neys, W. (2010) Heuristic bias, conflict, and rationality in decision-making. In Glatzeder, B., Goel, V., and Müller, A. (eds.), Towards a theory of thinking, (pp. 22–33). Springer.Google Scholar

Dennett, D. C. (1987). The intentional stance. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dennett, D. (1997). How to do other things with words. In Preston, J. (ed.), Thought and language (pp. 219–235). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Dèttore, D., & O’Connor, K. (2013). OCD and cognitive illusions. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 37(1), 109–121.Google Scholar

Dolscheid, S., Shayan, S., Majid, A., & Casasanto, D. (2013). The thickness of musical pitch: Psychophysical evidence for linguistic relativity. Psychological Science, 24(5), 613–621.Google Scholar

Earman, J. (1977). Against indeterminacy. Journal of Philosophy, 74(9), 535–538.Google Scholar

Earman, J., & Friedman, M. (1973). The meaning and status of Newton’s law of inertia and the nature of gravitational forces. Philosophy of Science, 40(3), 329–359.Google Scholar

Edwards, K., & Smith, E. E. (1996). A disconfirmation bias in the evaluation of arguments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(1), 5–24.Google Scholar

Egan, F. (2014). How to think about mental content. Philosophical Studies, 170(1), 115–135.Google Scholar

Eisen, J. L., Phillips, K. A., Coles, M. E., & Rasmussen, S. A. (2004). Insight in obsessive compulsive disorder and body dysmorphic disorder. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 45(1), 10–15.Google Scholar

Eichenbaum, H. (2007). Persistence: Necessary, but not sufficient. In Roediger, H., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. (eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 193–198). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Epstein, B. (2009). Ontological individualism reconsidered. Synthese, 166(1), 187–213.Google Scholar

Epstein, B. (2015). The ant trap: Rebuilding the foundations of the social sciences. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ereshefsky, M. (2007). Psychological categories as homologies: Lessons from ethology. Biology & Philosophy, 22(5), 659–674.Google Scholar

Ereshefsky, M. (2012). Homology thinking. Biology & Philosophy, 27(3), 381–400.Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B. T. (2011). Dual-process theories of reasoning: Contemporary issues and developmental applications. Developmental Review, 31(2–3), 86–102Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B. T. (2012). Questions and challenges for the new psychology of reasoning. Thinking & Reasoning, 18(1), 5–31.Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241.Google Scholar

Feusner, J., Hembacher, E., Moller, H., & Moody, T. (2011). Abnormalities of visual processing in body dysmorphic disorder. Psychological Medicine, 41(11), 2385–2397.Google Scholar

Feusner, J., Neziroglu, F., Wilhelm, S., Mancusi, L., & Bohon, C. (2010). What causes BDD: Research findings and a proposed model. Psychiatric Annals, 40(7), 349–355.Google Scholar

Feusner, J. D., Moller, H., Altstein, L., Sugar, C., Bookheimer, S., Yoon, J., & Hembacher, E. (2010). Inverted face processing in body dysmorphic disorder. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 44(15), 1088–1094.Google Scholar

Fine, C., Gardner, M., Craigie, J., & Gold, I. (2007). Hopping, skipping or jumping to conclusions? Clarifying the role of the JTC bias in delusions. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 12(1), 46–77.Google Scholar

Flake, J. K., & Fried, E. I. (2020). Measurement schmeasurement: Questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(4), 456–465.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (1981). Representations: Philosophical essays on the foundations of cognitive science. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (1987). Psychosemantics: The problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (1998). Concepts: Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A. (2000). The mind doesn’t work that way. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Fodor, J. A., Garrett, M. F., Walker, E. C. T., & Parkes, C. H. (1980). Against definitions. Cognition, 8(3), 263–367.Google Scholar

Foster, J. K. (2009). Memory: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Francken, J. C., & Slors, M. (2014). From commonsense to science, and back: The use of cognitive concepts in neuroscience. Consciousness and Cognition, 29, 248–258.Google Scholar

Francken, J. C., & Slors, M. (2018). Neuroscience and everyday life: Facing the translation problem. Brain and Cognition, 120, 67–74.Google Scholar

Garety, P. A., Bebbington, P., Fowler, D., Freeman, D., & Kuipers, E. (2007). Implications for neurobiological research of cognitive models of psychosis: A theoretical paper. Psychological Medicine, 37(10), 1377–1391.Google Scholar

Garson, J. (2011). Selected effects and causal role functions in the brain: The case for an etiological approach to neuroscience. Biology and Philosophy, 26(4), 547–565.Google Scholar

Garson, J. (2019). What biological functions are and why they matter. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gelman, S. A. (2004). Psychological essentialism in children. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(9), 404–409.Google Scholar

Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83(1), 49–79.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. (2003). Why we’re so smart. In Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in mind (pp. 195–235). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2004). Fast and frugal heuristics: The tools of bounded rationality. In Koehler, D. and Harvey, N. (eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 19–36). Blackwell.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2018). The bias bias in behavioral economics. Review of Behavioral Economics, 5(3–4), 303–336.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., & Brighton, H. (2009). Homo heuristicus: Why biased minds make better inferences. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(1), 107–143.Google Scholar

Gilovich, T., & Griffin, D. (2002). Introduction – Heuristics and biases: Then and now. In Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., and Kahneman, D., (eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 1–18). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gleitman, L. R., Armstrong, S. L., & Gleitman, H. (1983). On doubting the concept “concept.” In Scholnick, E. Kofsky (ed.), New trends in conceptual representation: Challenges to Piaget's theory? (pp. 87–110). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Gleitman, L., & Papafragou, A. (2005). Language and thought. In Holyoak, K. J. and Morrison, R. G. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 633–661). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Glennan, S. (2017). The new mechanical philosophy. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Godfrey-Smith, P. (2010). Causal pluralism. In Beebee, H., Hitchcock, C., and Menzies, P. (eds.), Oxford handbook of causation (pp. 326–337). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Goodman, N. (1954/1979). Fact, fiction, and forecast. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Gopnik, A. (1984). Conceptual and semantic change in scientists and children: Why there are no semantic universals. Linguistics, 20, 163–179.Google Scholar

Gopnik, A. (1988). Conceptual and semantic development as theory change: The case of object permanence. Mind & Language, 3(3), 197–216.Google Scholar

Gottfried, G. M., & Gelman, S. A. (2005). Developing domain-specific causal-explanatory frameworks: The role of insides and immanence. Cognitive Development, 20(1), 137–158.Google Scholar

Grace, S. A., Toh, W. L., Buchanan, B., Castle, D. J., & Rossell, S. L. (2019). Impaired recognition of negative facial emotions in body dysmorphic disorder. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 25(8), 884–889.Google Scholar

Greenberg, G. (2013). The book of woe: The DSM and the unmaking of psychiatry. Blue Rider Press.Google Scholar

Greif, M. L., Kemler Nelson, D. G., Keil, F. C., & Gutierrez, F. (2006). What do children want to know about animals and artifacts? Domain-specific requests for information. Psychological Science, 17(6), 455–459.Google Scholar

Griffiths, P. E. (1993). Functional analysis and proper functions. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 44(3), 409–422.Google Scholar

Griffiths, P. E. (2002). What is innateness? Monist, 85(1), 70–85.Google Scholar

Griffiths, P. E. (2004). Is emotion a natural kind? In Solomon, R. C. (ed.), Thinking about feeling: Contemporary philosophers on emotions (pp. 233–249). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Griffiths, P. E., & Machery, E. (2008). Innateness, canalization and “biologicizing the mind.” Philosophical Psychology, 21(3), 397–414.Google Scholar

Griffiths, P. E., & Stotz, K. (2008). Experimental philosophy of science. Philosophy Compass, 3(3), 507–521.Google Scholar

Griffiths, P. E., Machery, E., & Linquist, S. (2009). The vernacular concept of innateness. Mind & Language, 24(5), 605–630.Google Scholar

Gross, C. G. (2002). Genealogy of the “grandmother cell.” The Neuroscientist, 8(5), 512–518.Google Scholar

Hacking, I. (1991). A tradition of natural kinds. Philosophical Studies, 61(1–2), 109–126.Google Scholar

Hacking, I. (1995). The looping effects of human kinds. In Sperber, D., Premack, D., and Premack, A. J. (eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 351–394). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hahn, U., & Harris, A. J. L. (2014). What does it mean to be biased: Motivated reasoning and rationality. In Ross, B. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 61. The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 41–102). Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar

Haidt, J., & Joseph, C. (2007) The moral mind: How five sets of innate moral intuitions guide the development of many culture-specific virtues, and perhaps even modules. In Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., and Stich, S. (eds.), The innate mind (pp. 367–392). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hampton, J. A. (1997). Conceptual combination. In Lamberts, K. and Shanks, D. R. (eds.), Knowledge, concepts and categories (pp. 135–162). Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Hampton, J. A. (2006). Concepts as prototypes. In Ross, B. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 79–113). Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar

Harman, G. (1982). Conceptual role semantics. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 23(2), 242–256.Google Scholar

Harris, C., Rasmussen, A., & Berntsen, D. (2014). The functions of autobiographical memory: An integrative approach. Memory, 22(5), 559–581.Google Scholar

Haslanger, S. (2000). Gender and race: (What) are they? (What) do we want them to be? Noûs, 34(1), 31–55.Google Scholar

Hassabis, D., Kumaran, D., Vann, S. D., & Maguire, E. A. (2007). Patients with hippocampal amnesia cannot imagine new experiences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(5), 1726–1731.Google Scholar

Haugeland, J. (1998). Mind embodied and embedded. In Haugeland, J. (ed.), Having thought: Essays in the metaphysics of mind (pp. 207–237). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in the motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41(2), 301–307.Google Scholar

Heil, J. (1978). Traces of things past. Philosophy of Science, 45(1), 60–72.Google Scholar

Held, B. (2017). The distinction between psychological kinds and natural kinds revisited: Can updated natural-kind theory help clinical psychological science and beyond meet psychology’s philosophical challenges? Review of General Psychology, 21(1), 82–94.Google Scholar

Hermer, L., & Spelke, E. (1996). Modularity and development: The case of spatial reorientation. Cognition, 61(3), 195–232.Google Scholar

Hezel, D. M., & McNally, R. J. (2016). A theoretical review of cognitive biases and deficits in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Biological Psychology, 121(pt. B), 221–232.Google Scholar

Hirschfeld, L. A., & Gelman, S. A. (1994). Toward a topography of mind: An introduction to domain specificity. In Hirschfeld, L. A. and Gelman, S. A. (eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 3–35). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hoenig, K., Muller, C., Herrnberger, B., Sim, E. J., Spitzer, M., Ehret, G., & Kiefer, M. (2011). Neuroplasticity of semantic representations for musical instruments in professional musicians. Neuroimage, 56(3), 1714–1725.Google Scholar

Hoenig, K., Sim, E.-J., Bochev, V., Herrnberger, B., & Kiefer, M. (2008) Conceptual flexibility in the human brain: Dynamic recruitment of semantic maps from visual, motion and motor-related areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(10), 1799–1814.Google Scholar

Hoerl, C. (2001). The phenomenology of episodic recall. In Hoerl, C. and McCormack, T. (eds.), Time and memory: Issues in philosophy and psychology (pp. 315–338). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Hoerl, C. & McCormack, T. (2016). Making decisions about the future. In Michaelian, K., Klein, S. B., and Szpunar, K. K. (eds.), Seeing the future: Theoretical perspectives on future-oriented mental time travel (pp. 241–266). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Holmes, K. J., & Wolff, P. (2010). Simulation from schematics: Dorsal stream processing and the perception of implied motion. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2704–2709). Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar

Hunt, E., & Agnoli, F. (1991). The Whorfian hypothesis: A cognitive psychology perspective. Psychological Review, 98(3), 377–389.Google Scholar

Hutto, D. D., Peeters, A., & Segundo-Ortin, M., (2017). Cognitive ontology in flux: The possibility of protean brains. Philosophical Explorations, 20(2), 209–223.Google Scholar

Imai, M., & Gentner, D. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: Universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition, 62(2), 169–200.Google Scholar

Irish, M., Addis, D. R., Hodges, J. R., & Piguet, O. (2012). Considering the role of semantic memory in episodic future thinking: evidence from semantic dementia. Brain, 135(7), 2178–2191.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. Farrar, Strauss & Giroux.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., and Kahneman, D. (eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49–81). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kaplan, R., Rossell, S., Enticott, P., & Castle, D. (2013). Own-body perception in body dysmorphic disorder. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 18(6), 594–614.Google Scholar

Kay, P., & Kempton, W. (1984). What is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? American Anthropologist, 86(1), 65–79.Google Scholar

Keil, F.C. (1986). The acquisition of natural kind and artifact terms. In Demopoulos, W. and Marras, A. (eds.), Language learning and concept acquisition: Foundational issues (pp. 133–153). Ablex.Google Scholar

Keil, F.C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Keil, F. C. (1996). The growth of causal understandings of natural kinds. In Sperber, , D., Premack, D. and Premack, A. J. (eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 235–267). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kemmerer, D. L. (2019). Concepts in the brain: The view from cross-linguistic diversity. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kendig, C. (2015). Homologizing as kinding. In Kendig, C. (ed.), Natural kinds and classification in scientific practice (pp. 126–146). Routledge.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (1995). Two concepts of concept. Mind and Language, 10(4), 402–422.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (1998). Incommensurability in cognitive guise. Philosophical Psychology, 11(1), 29–43.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2001). Innateness and domain specificity. Philosophical Studies, 105(2), 191–210.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2002). Nature and nurture in cognition. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 53(2), 251–272.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2007). Innate cognitive capacities. Mind and Language, 22(1), 92–115.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2011). The pitfalls of microphysical realism. Philosophy of Science, 78(5), 1156–1164.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2013). Natural categories and human kinds: Classification in the natural and social sciences. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2016a). Innateness as a natural cognitive kind. Philosophical Psychology, 29(3), 319–333.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2016b). Mind-dependent kinds. Journal of Social Ontology, 2(2) 223–246.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2017). Crosscutting psycho-neural taxonomies: The case of episodic memory. Philosophical Explorations, 20(2), 191–208.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2018). Natural kinds as nodes in causal networks. Synthese, 195(4), 1379–1396.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2020). Neural correlates without reduction: The case of the critical period. Synthese, 197(5), 1947–1959.Google Scholar

Khalidi, M. A. (2021). Etiological kinds. Philosophy of Science, 88(1), 1–21.Google Scholar

Kim, J. (1992). Multiple realization and the metaphysics of reduction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 52(1), 1–26.Google Scholar

Kincaid, H., & Sullivan, J. A. (Eds.). (2014). Classifying psychopathology: Mental kinds and natural kinds. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kitcher, P. (1984). Species. Philosophy of Science, 51(2), 308–333.Google Scholar

Kitcher, P. (1997). The lives to come: The genetic revolution and human possibilities. Free Press.Google Scholar

Kitcher, P. (1998). Marr’s computational theory of vision. Philosophy of Science, 55(1), 1–24.Google Scholar

Klayman, J. (1995). Varieties of confirmation bias. In Busemeyer, J., Hastie, R., & Medin, D. L. (eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 32 (pp. 385–418). Academic Press.Google Scholar

Klayman, J., & Ha, Y. W. (1987). Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing. Psychological Review, 94(2), 211–228.Google Scholar

Klein, C. (2012). Cognitive ontology and region- versus network-oriented analyses. Philosophy of Science, 79(5), 952–960.Google Scholar

Klein, S. B. (2013). Making the case that episodic recollection is attributable to operations occurring at retrieval rather than to content stored in a dedicated subsystem of long-term memory. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 7(3), 1–14.Google Scholar

Klein, S. B. (2015). What memory is. WIREs Cognitive Science, 6(1), 1–38.Google Scholar

Klein, S. B., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., & Chance, S. (2002). Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions. Psychological Review, 109(2), 306–329.Google Scholar

Knobe, J., & Samuels, R. (2013). Thinking like a scientist: Innateness as a case study. Cognition, 126(1), 72–86.Google Scholar

Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (1996). Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. Psychological Review, 103(3), 490–517.Google Scholar

Kornblith, H. (1993). Inductive inference and its natural ground. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kornblith, H. (1994). Naturalism: Both metaphysical and epistemological. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 19(1), 39–52 (reprinted in Kornblith, H. (2014). A naturalistic epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.)Google Scholar

Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and necessity. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kruglanski, A. W., & Gigerenzer, G. (2011). Intuitive and deliberate judgments are based on common principles. Psychological Review, 118(1), 97–109.Google Scholar

Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498.Google Scholar

Kwan, D., Craver, C. F., Green, L., Myerson, J., Boyer, P., & Rosenbaum, S. (2012). Future decision-making without episodic mental time travel. Hippocampus, 22(6), 1215–1219.Google Scholar

Kwan, D., Craver, C. F., Green, L., Myerson, J., Gao, F., Black, S. E., & Rosenbaum, R. S. (2015). Cueing the personal future to reduce discounting in intertemporal choice: Is episodic prospection necessary? Hippocampus, 25(4), 432–443.Google Scholar

Ladyman, J., & Ross, D. (2007). Every thing must go: Metaphysics naturalized. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Laurence, S., & Margolis, E. (1999). Concepts and cognitive science. In Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (eds.), Concepts: CoreReadings (pp. 3–81). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Laurence, S., & Margolis, E. (2001). The poverty of the stimulus argument. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 52(2), 217–276.Google Scholar

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): 1764–1801.Google Scholar

Lello, L., Avery, S. G., Tellier, L., Vazquez, A. I., Campos, G., & Hsu, S. D. H. (2018). Accurate genomic prediction of human height. Genetics, 210(2), 477–497.Google Scholar

Leslie, S. J. (2013). Essence and natural kinds: When science meets preschooler intuition. Oxford Studies in Epistemology, 4, 108–166.Google Scholar

Levinson, S. C. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lewis, D. (1983). New work for a theory of universals. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 61(4), 343–377.Google Scholar

Li, P., Dunham, Y., & Carey, S. (2009). Of substance: The nature of language effects on entity construal. Cognitive Psychology, 58(4), 487–524.Google Scholar

Linquist, S., Machery, E., Griffiths, P. E., & Stotz, K. (2011). Exploring the folkbiological conception of human nature. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 366(1563), 444–453.Google Scholar

Lindquist, K., Wager, T., Kober, H., Bliss-Moreau, E., & Barrett, L. (2012). The brain basis of emotion: A meta-analytic review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35(3), 121–143.Google Scholar

Lisman, J. (2007). Integrative comments persistence: In search of molecular persistence. In Roediger, H., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. (eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 203–208). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Liu, S., Brooks, N. B., & Spelke, E. S. (2019). Origins of the concepts cause, cost, and goal in prereaching infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(36), 17747–17752.Google Scholar

Liu, X., Ramirez, S., & Tonegawa, S. (2014). Inception of a false memory by optogenetic manipulation of a hippocampal memory engram. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 369(1633), 20130142.Google Scholar

Loftus, E. (2003). Our changeable memories: Legal and practical implications. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(3), 231–234.Google Scholar

Loftus, E. F., & Pickrell, J. E. (1995). The formation of false memories. Psychiatric annals, 25(12), 720–725.Google Scholar

Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098–2109.Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. (2006). The four-category ontology: A metaphysical foundation for natural science. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ludwig, D. (2016). Ontological choices and the value-free ideal. Erkenntnis, 81, 1253–1272.Google Scholar

Lupyan, G. (2012). Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: The label-feedback hypothesis. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(54), 1–13.Google Scholar

Lupyan, G., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2012). The evocative power of words: Activation of concepts by verbal and nonverbal means. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 141(1), 170–186.Google Scholar

Lupyan, G., Rahman, R. A., Boroditsky, L., & Clark, A. (2020). Effects of language on visual perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(11), 930–944.Google Scholar

Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67(1), 1–25.Google Scholar

Machery, E. (2005). Concepts are not a natural kind. Philosophy of Science, 72(3), 444–467.Google Scholar

Machery, E. (2007). Concept empiricism: A methodological critique. Cognition, 104(1), 19–46.Google Scholar

Machery, E. (2009). Doing without concepts. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Maher, B. A. (1988). Anomalous experience and delusional thinking: The logic of explanations. In Oltmanns, T. F. and Maher, B. A. (eds.), Delusional beliefs (pp. 15–33). Wiley.Google Scholar

Mahon, B. Z., & Hickok, G. (2016). Arguments about the nature of concepts: Symbols, embodiment, and beyond. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(4), 941–958.Google Scholar

Mahr, J. B., & Csibra, G. (2018). Why do we remember? The communicative function of episodic memory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 41, 1–16.Google Scholar

Majid, A. (2002). Frames of reference and language concepts. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(12), 503–504.Google Scholar

Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D. B. M., & Levinson, S. C. (2004). Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 108–114.Google Scholar

Mallon, R. (2003). Social construction, social roles, and stability. In Schmitt, F. (ed.), Socializing metaphysics: The nature of social reality (pp. 327–354). Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

Mallon, R., & Weinberg, J. M. (2006). Innateness as closed process invariance. Philosophy of Science, 73(3), 323–344.Google Scholar

Mameli, M. (2008). On innateness: The clutter hypothesis and the cluster hypothesis. Journal of Philosophy, 105(12), 719–736.Google Scholar

Mameli, M., & Bateson, P. E. (2006). Innateness and the sciences. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 155–188.Google Scholar

Mameli, M., & Bateson, P. E. (2011). An evaluation of the concept of innateness. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 366(1563), 436–443.Google Scholar

Mandelbaum, D. (Ed.) (1949). Selected writings of Edward Sapir. University of California Press.Google Scholar

Mandler, J. M. (1992). How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review, 99(4), 587–604.Google Scholar

Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar

Martin, C. B., & Deutscher, M. (1966). Remembering. The Philosophical Review, 75(2), 161–196.Google Scholar

McCaffrey, J. (2015a). Reconceiving conceptual vehicles: Lessons from semantic dementia. Philosophical Psychology, 28(3), 337–354.Google Scholar

McCaffrey, J. (2015b). The brain’s heterogeneous functional landscape. Philosophy of Science, 82(5), 1010–1022.Google Scholar

McCaffrey, J. & Machery, E. (2012). Philosophical issues about concepts. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews, 3(2), 265–279.Google Scholar

McKone, E., Kanwisher, N., & Duchaine, B. C. (2007). Can generic expertise explain special processing for faces? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(1), 8–15.Google Scholar

McGeer, V. (2015). Mind-making practices: The social infrastructure of self-knowing agency and responsibility. Philosophical Explorations, 18(2), 259–281.Google Scholar

McIntosh, A. R. (2004). Contexts and catalysts: A resolution of the localization and integration of function in the brain. Neuroinformatics, 2(2), 175–182.Google Scholar

McKone, E. Kanwisher, N., & Duchaine, B.C. (2007). Can generic expertise explain special processing for faces? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(1), 8–15.Google Scholar

McLean, B., Mattiske, J., & Balzan, R. (2017). Association of the jumping to conclusions and evidence integration biases with delusions in psychosis: A detailed meta-analysis. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 43(2), 344–354.Google Scholar

Mercier, H. (2017). Confirmation bias: Myside bias. In Pohl, R. F. (ed.), Cognitive illusions: Intriguing phenomena in thinking, judgment and memory (pp. 99–114). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar

Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(2), 57–74.Google Scholar

Michaelian, K. (2011a). Generative memory. Philosophical Psychology, 24(3), 323–342.Google Scholar

Michaelian, K. (2011b). Is memory a natural kind? Memory Studies, 4(2), 170–189.Google Scholar

Michaelian, K. (2016). Mental time travel: Episodic memory and our knowledge of the personal past. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Mill, J. S. (1843/1882). A system of logic (8th edition). Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar

Millikan, R. G. (1989). In defense of proper functions. Philosophy of Science, 56(2), 288–302.Google Scholar

Millikan, R. G. (1999). Historical kinds and the "special sciences.” Philosophical Studies, 95(1/2), 45–65.Google Scholar

Morris, R. G. M. (2007). Integrative comments: Distinctions and dilemmas. In Roediger, H. L., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. M. (eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 29–34). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Mufaddel, A., Osman, O. T., Almugaddam, F., & Jafferany, M. (2013). A review of body dysmorphic disorder and its presentation in different clinical settings. The Primary Care Companion for CNS Disorders, 15(4), PCC.12r01464.Google Scholar

Mugg, J. (2016). The dual-process turn: How recent defenses of dual-process theories of reasoning fail. Philosophical Psychology, 29(2), 300–309.Google Scholar

Mugg, J., & Khalidi, M. A. (2021). Self-reflexive cognitive bias. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 11(3), 1–21.Google Scholar

Mundy, M., & Sadusky, A. (2014). Abnormalities in visual processing amongst students with body image concerns. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 10(2), 39–48.Google Scholar

Munro, G. D., & Stansbury, J. A. (2009). The dark side of self-affirmation: Confirmation bias and illusory correlation in response to threatening information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(9), 1143–1153.Google Scholar

Murphy, D. (2006). Psychiatry in the scientific image. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. L. (1985) The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92(3), 289–316.Google Scholar

Nadel, L., Samsonovich, A., Ryan, L., & Moscovitch, M. (2000). Multiple trace theory of human memory: computational, neuroimaging, and neuropsychological results. Hippocampus, 10(4), 352–368.Google Scholar

Nader, K., & Hardt, O. (2009). A single standard for memory: The case for reconsolidation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10(3), 224–234.Google Scholar

Nagel, E. (1961). The structure of science: Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar

Nathan, M. J., & Del Pinal, G. D. (2016). Mapping the mind: Bridge laws and the psycho-neural interface. Synthese, 193(2), 637–657.Google Scholar

Neander, K. (1991). Functions as selected effects: The conceptual analyst’s defense. Philosophy of Science, 58(2), 168–184.Google Scholar

Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1976). Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search. Communications of the ACM, 19(3), 113–126.Google Scholar

Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (2007). Computer science as empirical inquiry: Symbols and search. ACM Turing Award Lectures, 19(3), 113–126.Google Scholar

Nickerson, R. S. (1996). Hempel’s paradox and Wason’s selection task: Logical and psychological puzzles of confirmation. Thinking and Reasoning, 2(1), 1–31.Google Scholar

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.Google Scholar

Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330.Google Scholar

Oldham, J., Hollander, E., & Skodol, A. (Eds.) (1996). Impulsivity and compulsivity. American Psychiatric Press.Google Scholar

Oosthuizen, P., Lambert, T., & Castle, D. J. (1998). Dysmorphic concern: Prevalence and associations with clinical variables. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 32(1), 129–132.Google Scholar

Oppenheim, P., & Putnam, H. (1958). Unity of science as a working hypothesis. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 2, 3–36.Google Scholar

Oreg, S., & Bayazit, M. (2009). Prone to bias: Development of a bias taxonomy from an individual differences perspective. Review of General Psychology, 13(3), 175–193.Google Scholar

Oswald, M. E., & Grosjean, S. (2004). Confirmation bias. In Pohl, R. F. (ed.), Cognitive illusions: A handbook on fallacies and biases in thinking, judgment, and memory. Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Partanen, E., Kujala, T., Tervaniemi, M., & Huotilainen, M. (2013). Prenatal music exposure induces long-term neural effects. PLoS ONE, 8(10), e78946.Google Scholar

Perry, L. K., & Lupyan, G. (2013). What the online manipulation of linguistic activity can tell us about language and thought. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 7, 122.Google Scholar

Phillips, K. (1996/2005). The broken mirror: Understanding and treating body dysmorphic disorder (2nd edition). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Phillips, K., Pinto, A., Hart, A., Coles, M., Eisen, J., Menard, W., & Rasmmussen, S. (2012). A comparison of insight in body dysmorphic disorder and obsessive compulsive disorder. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 46(10), 1293–1299.Google Scholar

Phillips, K. A. (1996/2005). The broken mirror: Understanding and treating Body Dysmorphic Disorder. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Phillips, K. A., Wilhelm, S., Koran, L. M., Didie, E. R., Fallon, B. A., Feusner, J., & Stein, D. J. (2010). Body dysmorphic disorder: Some key issues for DSM‐V. Depression and anxiety, 27(6), 573–591.Google Scholar

PhilPapers Survey (2009). https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl (accessed March 9, 2020).Google Scholar

Pinker, S. (1995). The Language instinct: How the mind creates language. Harper.Google Scholar

Pober, J. M. (2013). Addiction is not a natural kind. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 4, 1–11.Google Scholar

Pohl, R. F. (2017). Cognitive illusions. In Pohl, R. F. (ed.), Cognitive illusions: Intriguing phenomena in thinking, judgment and memory(2nd edition) (pp. 3–21). Routledge.Google Scholar

Poldrack, R. A. (2012). The future of fMRI in cognitive neuroscience. Neuroimage, 62(2), 1216–1220.Google Scholar

Poldrack, R. A., Halchenko, Y. O., & Hanson, S. J. (2009). Decoding the large-scale structure of brain function by classifying mental states across individuals. Psychological Science, 20(11), 1364–1372.Google Scholar

Poldrack, R. A., & Yarkoni, T. (2016). From brain maps to cognitive ontologies: Informatics and the search for mental structure. Annual Review of Psychology, 67(1), 587–612.Google Scholar

Polger, T. W. (2002). Putnam’s intuition. Philosophical Studies, 109(2), 143–170.Google Scholar

Polger, T. W. (2009). Evaluating the evidence for multiple realization. Synthese, 167(3), 457–472.Google Scholar

Polimeni, J., & Reiss, J. P. (2003). Evolutionary perspectives on schizophrenia. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(1), 34–39.Google Scholar

Pöyhönen, S. (2013). Carving the mind by its joints: Culture-bound psychiatric disorders as natural kinds. In Miłkowski, M.and Talmont-Kaminski, K. (eds.), Regarding the mind, naturally: Naturalist approaches to the sciences of the mental (pp. 30–48). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar

Pöyhönen, H. S. (2015). Memory as a cognitive kind: Brains, remembering dyads, and exograms. In Kendig, C. (ed.), Natural kinds and classification in scientific practice (pp. 145–156). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar

Price, C., & Friston, K. (2005) Functional ontologies for cognition: The systematic definition of structure and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3–4), 262–275.Google Scholar

Putnam, H. (1974). Meaning and reference. Journal of Philosophy, 70(19), 699–711.Google Scholar

Putnam, H. (1975). Mind, language and reality. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Quian Quiroga, R., Reddy, L., Kreiman, G., Koch, C., & Fried, I. (2005). Invariant visual representation by single neurons in the human brain. Nature, 435(7045), 1102–1107.Google Scholar

Rabin, G. O. (2018). Grounding orthodoxy and the layered conception. In Bliss, R. and Priest, G. (eds.), Reality and its structure: Essays in fundamentality (pp. 37–49). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Radick, G. (2012). Should “heredity” and “inheritance” be biological terms? William Bateson’s change of mind as a historical and philosophical problem. Philosophy of Science, 79(5), 714–724.Google Scholar

Reines, F. M., & Prinz, J. (2009). Reviving Whorf: The return of linguistic relativity. Philosophy Compass, 4(6), 1022–1032.Google Scholar

Rajaram, S. (1993). Remembering and knowing: Two means of access to the personal past. Memory & Cognition, 21(1), 89–102.Google Scholar

Rajsic, J., Wilson, D. E., & Pratt, J. (2015). Confirmation bias in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(5), 1353–1364.Google Scholar

Reese, H. E., McNally, R. J., & Wilhelm, S. (2010). Facial asymmetry detection in patients with body dysmorphic disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 48(9), 936–940.Google Scholar

Rey, G. (1983). Concepts and stereotypes. Cognition, 15(1–3), 237–262.Google Scholar

Rey, G. (1985). Concepts and conceptions: A reply to Smith, Medin, and Rips. Cognition, 19(3), 297–303.Google Scholar

Rivera, R., & Borda, T. (2001). The etiology of body dysmorphic disorder. Psychiatric Annals, 31(9), 559–563.Google Scholar

Robins, S. K. (2016a). Misremembering. Philosophical Psychology, 29(3), 432–447.Google Scholar

Robins, S. K. (2016b). Optogenetics and the mechanism of false memory. Synthese, 193(5), 1561–1583.Google Scholar

Robins, S. (2016c). Representing the past: Memory traces and the causal theory of memory. Philosophical Studies, 173(11), 2993–3013.Google Scholar

Robins, S. (2017). Memory traces. In Bernecker, S., & Michaelian, K. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of memory (pp. 76–87). Routledge.Google Scholar

Robins, S., & Schulz, A. (forthcoming). Episodic memory, simulated future planning, and their evolution.Google Scholar

Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 803–814.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 192–233.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In Rosch, E. and Lloyd, B. B. (eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 28–49). Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 573–605.Google Scholar

Rosch, E., Simpson, C., & Miller, R. S. (1976). Structural bases of typicality effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(4), 491–502.Google Scholar

Rosen, D. A. (1975). An argument for the logical notion of a memory trace. Philosophy of Science, 42(1), 1–10.Google Scholar

Rosen, J. (1995). The nature of body dysmorphic disorder and treatment with cognitive behavior therapy. Cognitive and Behavioural Practice, 2(1), 143–166.Google Scholar

Ross, L. N. (2020). Causal concepts in biology: How pathways differ from mechanisms and why it matters. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 72(1), 131–158.Google Scholar

Rupert, R. D. (2013). Memory, natural kinds, and cognitive extension; or, Martians don’t remember, and cognitive science Is not about cognition. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 4(1), 25–47Google Scholar

Samuels, R. (1998). Evolutionary psychology and the massive modularity thesis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 49(4), 575–602.Google Scholar

Samuels, R. (2002). Innateness in cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 136–141.Google Scholar

Samuels, R. (2007). Is innateness a confused notion? In Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., and Stich, S. (eds.), The innate mind: Foundations and the future (pp. 17–36). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Samuels, R. (2009a). Delusion as a natural kind. In Broome, M. and Bortolotti, L. (eds.), Psychiatry as cognitive neuroscience: Philosophical perspectives (pp. 49–79). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Samuels, R. (2009b). The magical number two, plus or minus: Dual process theory as a theory of cognitive kinds. In Evans, J. St. B. and Frankish, K. E. (eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 129–146). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Samuels, R., & Ferreira, M. (2010). Why don’t concepts constitute a natural kind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 222–223.Google Scholar

Sander, D., Grafman, J., & Zalla, T. (2003). The human amygdala: An evolved system for relevance detection. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 14(4), 303–316.Google Scholar

Saxe, R. (2010). The right temporo-parietal junction: A specific brain region for thinking about thoughts. In Leslie, A. and German, T. (eds.), Handbook of theory of mind. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Saxe, R., Brett, M., & Kanwisher, N. (2006). Divide and conquer: A defense of functional localizers. NeuroImage, 30(4), 1088–1096.Google Scholar

Schacter, D. L. (1996). Searching for memory: The brain, the mind, and the past. Basic Books.Google Scholar

Schacter, D. L. (2007). Memory: Delineating the core. In Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 23–28). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Schacter, D. L., & Addis, D. R. (2009). On the nature of medial temporal lobe contributions to the constructive simulation of future events. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1521), 1245–1253.Google Scholar

Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., & Buckner, R. L. (2007). The prospective brain: Remembering the past to imagine the future. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(9), 657–661.Google Scholar

Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., Hassabis, D., Martin, V. C., Spreng, R. N., & Szpunar, K. K. (2012). The future of memory: Remembering, imagining, and the brain. Neuron, 76(4), 677–694.Google Scholar

Schaffer, J. (2003). Is there a fundamental level? Nous, 37(3), 498–517.Google Scholar

Schaffner, K. F. (1998). Genes, behavior, and developmental emergentism: One process, indivisible? Philosophy of Science, 65(2), 209–252.Google Scholar

Schectman, M. (1994). The truth about memory. Philosophical Psychology, 7(1), 3–18.Google Scholar

Scholz, J., Triantafyllou, C., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., Brown, E. N., & Saxe, R. (2009). Distinct regions of right temporo-parietal junction are selective for theory of mind and exogenous attention. PloS ONE, 4(3), e4869.Google Scholar

Sera, M. D., Elieff, C., Forbes, J., Burch, M. C., & Dubois, D. P. (2002). When language affects cognition and when it does not: An analysis of grammatical gender and classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(3), 377–397.Google Scholar

Shagrir, O., & Bechtel, W. (2017). Marr’s computational level and delineating phenomena. In Kaplan, D. M. (ed.), Explanation and integration in mind and brain science (pp. 190–214). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Shapiro, L. A. (2004). The mind incarnate. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Shea, N. (2003). Does externalism entail the anomalism of the mental? Philosophical Quarterly, 53(211), 201–213.Google Scholar

Shea, N. (2012a). New thinking, innateness, and inherited representation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599), 2234–2244.Google Scholar

Shea, N. (2012b). Genetic representation explains the cluster of innateness-related properties. Mind and Language, 27(4), 466–493.Google Scholar

Shea, N. (2013). Inherited representations are read in development. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 64(1), 1–31.Google Scholar

Shea, N. (2018). Representation in cognitive science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Simon, H. (1969/1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd edition). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Slobin, D. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking.” In Gumperz, J. J. and Levinson, S. C. (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70–96). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Slobin, D. I. (2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 157–191). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Sloman, S., Lombrozo, T., & Malt, B. (2007). Ontological commitments and domain specific categorisation. In Robert, M. J. (ed.) Integrating the mind: Domain general versus domain specific processes in higher cognition (pp. 105–129). Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Smith, E. E., Medin, D. L., & Rips, L. J. (1984). A psychological approach to concepts: Comments on Rey’s “concepts and stereotypes.” Cognition, 17(3), 265–274.Google Scholar

Sober, E. (1999). The multiple realizability argument against reductionism. Philosophy of Science, 66(4), 542–564.Google Scholar

Solomon, G. E. A. (1990). Psychology of novice and expert wine talk. American Journal of Psychology, 103(4), 495–517.Google Scholar

Spelke, E. (2003). What makes us smart? Core knowledge and natural language. In Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in mind (pp. 277–311). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Spelke, E. S., & Newport, E. L. (1998). Nativism, empiricism, and the development of knowledge. In Lerner, R. M. (ed.) Handbook of child psychology: Volume 1: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 275–340). Wiley.Google Scholar

Sperber, D. (1994). The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations. In Hirschfeld, L. A. and Gelman, S. A.(eds.) Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 39–67). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Spunt, R. P., & Adolphs, R. (2017). A new look at domain specificity: Insights from social neuroscience. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(9), 559–567.Google Scholar

Spunt, R. P., & Lieberman, M. D. (2012). Dissociating modality-specific and supramodal neural systems for action understanding. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(10), 3575–3583.Google Scholar

Stanley, M. L., Henne, P., Yang, B. W., & De Brigard, F. (2020). Resistance to position change, motivated reasoning, and polarization. Political Behavior, 42(3), 891–913.Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. (2010) Rationality and the reflective mind. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E. (2016) The comprehensive assessment of rational thinking, Educational Psychologist, 51(1), 23–34Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E., Toplak, M. E., & West, R. F. (2008). The development of rational thought: A taxonomy of heuristics and biases. In Kail, R. V. (ed.), Advances in child development and behavior: Vol. 36 (pp. 251–285). Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar

Stanovich, K. E., Toplak, M. E., & West, R. F. (2020). Intelligence and rationality. In Sternberg, R. J. (ed.), Cambridge handbook of intelligence (2nd edition) (pp. 1106–1139). Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar

Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2013). Myside bias, rational thinking, and intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(4), 259–264.Google Scholar

Stein, E. (1996). Without good reason: The rationality debate in philosophy and cognitive science. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Stein, E. (1997). Can we be justified in believing that humans are irrational? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 57(3), 545–565.Google Scholar

Sterelny, K. (2003). Thought in a hostile world: The evolution of human cognition. Blackwell.Google Scholar

Sterelny, K., & Griffiths, P.E. (1999). Sex and death: An introduction to the philosophy of biology. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Sternberg, R. J. (2009) Domain-generality versus domain-specificity of creativity. In Meusburger, P., Funke, J., and Wunder, E. (eds.) Milieus of creativity: Knowledge and space, Vol. 2 (pp. 25–38). Springer.Google Scholar

Stinson, C. (2016). Mechanisms in psychology: Ripping nature at its seams. Synthese, 193(5), 1585–1614.Google Scholar

Stich, S. P. (1975). Introduction: The idea of innateness. In Stich, S. P. (ed.), Innate ideas (pp. 1–22). University of California Press.Google Scholar

Stich, S. P. (1985). From folk psychology to cognitive science: The case against belief. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Suddendorf, T., & Corballis, M. C. (1997). Mental time travel and the evolution of the human mind. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 123(2), 133–167.Google Scholar

Suddendorf, T., & Corballis, M. C. (2007). The evolution of foresight: What is mental time travel, and is it unique to humans? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(3), 299–313.Google Scholar

Suddendorf, T., Addis, D. R., & Corballis, M. C. (2009). Mental time travel and the shaping of the human mind. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1521), 1317–1324.Google Scholar

Suppes, P., Han, B., Epelboim, J., & Lu, I. Z. L. (1999). Invariance of brain-wave representations of simple visual images and their names. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96(25), 14658–14663.Google Scholar

Szpunar, K. (2010). Episodic future thought: An emerging concept. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(2), 142–162.Google Scholar

Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755–769.Google Scholar

Thompson, R. F. (1991). Are memory traces localized or distributed? Neuropsychologia, 29(6), 571–582.Google Scholar

Thompson, R. F. (2007). Persistence: Discrepancies between behaviors and brains. In Roediger, H. L., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. M. (eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 199–201). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Toh, W., Rossell, S., & Castle, D. (2009). Body dysmorphic disorder: A review of current nosological issues and associated cognitive deficits. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 5(4), 261–270.Google Scholar

Toh, W. L., Castle, D. J., Mountjoy, R. L., Buchanan, B., Farhall, J., & Rossell, S. L. (2017). Insight in body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) relative to obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and psychotic disorders: Revisiting this issue in light of DSM-5. Comprehensive psychiatry, 77, 100–108.Google Scholar

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The cognitive reflection test as a predictor of performance on heuristics-and-biases tasks. Memory and Cognition, 39(7), 1275–1289.Google Scholar

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Assessing the development of rationality. In Markovits, H. (ed.), The developmental psychology of reasoning and decision-making (pp. 7–35). Psychological Press.Google Scholar

Tsou, J. Y. (2013). Depression and suicide are natural kinds: Implications for physician-assisted suicide. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 36(5–6), 461–470.Google Scholar

Tsou, J. Y. (2016). Natural kinds, psychiatric classification and the history of the DSM. History of Psychiatry, 27(4), 406–424.Google Scholar

Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In Tulving, E. and Donaldson, W. (eds.), Organization of memory, (pp. 381–403). Academic Press.Google Scholar

Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 26(1), 1–12.Google Scholar

Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 1–25.Google Scholar

Tulving, E. (2007). Coding and representation: Searching for a home in the brain. In Roediger, H. L., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. M. (eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 65–68). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Tulving, E., Schacter, D. L., McLachlan, D. R., & Moscovitch, M. (1988). Priming of semantic autobiographical knowledge: A case study of retrograde amnesia. Brain and Cognition, 8(1), 3–20.Google Scholar

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science: New Series, 185(4157), 1124–1131.Google Scholar

Tyler, L. K., & Moss, H. E. (2001). Towards a distributed account of conceptual knowledge. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(6), 244–252.Google Scholar

Van Brakel, J. (1995). Consciousness is not a natural kind. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 18(2), 269–270.Google Scholar

van Dam, W. O., van Dijk, M., Bekkering, H., & Rueschemeyer, S. A. (2012). Flexibility in embodied lexical-semantic representations. Human Brain Mapping, 33(10), 2322–2333.Google Scholar

van Dam, W. O., Brazil, I. A., Bekkering, H., & Rueschemeyer, S. A. (2014). Flexibility in embodied language processing: Context effects in lexical access. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6(3), 407–424.Google Scholar

Veale, D. (2004). Advances in a cognitive behavioural model of body dysmorphic disorder. Body Image, 1(1), 113–125.Google Scholar

Veale, D., & Riley, S. (2001). Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the ugliest of them all? The psychopathology of mirror gazing in body dysmorphic disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 39(12), 1381–1393.Google Scholar

Venn, J. (1889/1907). The principles of empirical or inductive logic (2nd edition). Macmillan.Google Scholar

Waismeyer, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Gopnik, A. (2015). Causal learning from probabilistic events in 24‐month‐olds: An action measure. Developmental Science, 18(1), 175–182.Google Scholar

Wakefield, J. C. (1992). The concept of mental disorder: On the boundary between biological facts and social values. American Psychologist, 47(3), 373–388.Google Scholar

Wason, P.C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(3), 129–140.Google Scholar

Waxman, S. R., & Gelman, S. A. (2010). Different kinds of concepts and different kinds of words: What words do for human cognition. In Mareschal, D., Quinn, P. C., and Lea, S. E. G. (eds.), Oxford series in developmental cognitive neuroscience: The making of human concepts (pp. 99–129). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Weinberg, J. M., & Mallon, R. (2008). Living with innateness (and environmental dependence too). Philosophical Psychology, 21(3), 415–424.Google Scholar

Weiskopf, D. A. (2007). Concept empiricism and the vehicles of thought. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 14(9–10), 156–183.Google Scholar

Weiskopf, D. A. (2009). The plurality of concepts. Synthese, 169(1), 145–173.Google Scholar

Weiskopf, D. A. (2011). The functional unity of special science kinds. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 62(2), 233–258.Google Scholar

Weiskopf, D. A. (2017a). An ideal disorder? Autism as a psychiatric kind. Philosophical Explorations, 20(2), 175–190.Google Scholar

Weiskopf, D. A. (2017b). The explanatory autonomy of cognitive models. In Kaplan, D. M. (ed.), Explanation and integration in mind and brain science (pp. 44–69). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (1984). Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 7(1), 49–63.Google Scholar

Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (2005). Speech perception as a window for understanding plasticity and commitment in language systems of the brain. Developmental Psychobiology, 46(3), 233–251.Google Scholar

Werning, M., & Cheng, S. (2017). Taxonomy and unity of memory. In Bernecker, S. and Michaelian, K. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of memory (pp. 7–20). Routledge.Google Scholar

Whewell, W. (1840/1847). The philosophy of the inductive sciences (2nd edition). John W. Parker.Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, A. (2007). Is “remember” a universal human concept? “Memory” and culture. In Amberber, M. (ed.), Memory in language and thought (pp. 13–39). John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar

Wilson-Mendenhall, C. D., Simmons, W. K., Martin, A., & Barsalou, L. W. (2013). Contextual processing of abstract concepts reveals neural representations of non-linguistic semantic content. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(6), 920–935.Google Scholar

Wimsatt, W. C. (1999). Generativity, entrenchment, innateness, and evolution: Philosophy, evolutionary biology, and conceptual foundations of science. In Hardcastle, V. G. (ed.), Where biology meets psychology: Philosophical essays (pp. 139–179). MIT Press.Google Scholar

Wimsatt, W. C. (2007). Re-engineering philosophy for limited beings: Piecewise approximations to reality. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Winawer, J., Witthoft, N., Frank, M. C., Wu, L., Wade, A. R., & Boroditsky, L. (2007). Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 104(19), 7780–7785.Google Scholar

Wiser, M. (1988). The differentiation of heat and temperature: History of science and novice-expert shift. In Strauss, S. (ed.), Ontogeny, phylogeny, and historical development. Ablex.Google Scholar

Wiser, M., & Carey, S. (1983). When heat and temperature were one. In Gentner, D. and Stevens, A. L. (eds.), Mental models (pp 267–297). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Wolfe, C. R., & Britt, M. A. (2008). The locus of the myside bias in written argumentation. Thinking & Reasoning, 14(1), 1–27.Google Scholar

Wolff, P., & Holmes, K. J. (2011). Linguistic relativity. WIREs Cognitive Science, 2(3), 253–265.Google Scholar

Wood, T., & Porter, E. (2019). The elusive backfire effect: Mass attitudes’ steadfast factual adherence. Political Behavior, 41(1), 135–163.Google Scholar

Woodward, J. (2017). Explanation in neurobiology: An interventionist perspective. In Kaplan, D. M. (ed.), Explanation and integration in mind and brain science (pp. 70–100). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Woodward, T. S., Moritz, S., Cuttler, C., & Whitman, J. C. (2006). The contribution of a cognitive bias against disconfirmatory evidence (BADE) to delusions in schizophrenia. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 28(4), 605–617.Google Scholar

Yee, E., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2016). Putting concepts into context. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 23(4), 1015–1027.Google Scholar

Ylikoski, P., & Pöyhönen, S. (2015). Addiction-as-kind hypothesis. International Journal of Alcohol and Drug Research, 4(1), 21–25.Google Scholar

Young, L., & Saxe, R. (2009). Innocent intentions: A correlation between forgiveness for accidental harm and neural activity. Neuropsychologia, 47(10), 2065–2072.Google Scholar

Yovel, G., & Kanwisher, N. (2004) Face perception: Domain specific not process specific. Neuron, 44(5), 889–898.Google Scholar

Zachar, P. (2000). Psychiatric disorders are not natural kinds. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology, 7(3) 167–182.Google Scholar

Book contents

References

Summary

Access options

References

Book contents

References

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive