Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T10:04:46.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - Kuhn, Conceptual Change, and Cognitive Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2009

By
Nancy J. Nersessian
Edited by
Thomas Nickles
Nancy J. Nersessian
Affiliation:
Professor of Cognitive Science and Coordinator of the Cognitive Science Program, Georgia Institute of Technology
Thomas Nickles
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Reno
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

The research project outlined in Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions seems intrinsically historical, philosophical, and psychological (Kuhn 1970). However, by and large, Kuhn never utilized research in the cognitive sciences that would have furthered his own paradigm in ways I think he would have found agreeable. Until his very last writings, psychology dropped out of Kuhn's post-Structure published articulations of his views just at the time that the cognitive revolution was beginning to provide accounts of representation, problem solving, and learning that I believe are pertinent to his intuitive insights. With hindsight one can construct significant parallels between the views of knowledge, perception, and learning developed in each. In what follows I will discuss in what ways some of Kuhn's insights might be furthered today in light of cognitive science research. Seen through a cognitive lens, Kuhn's little book seems all the more remarkable and insightful. Many of the issues with which he grappled have been the subject of entire areas of research in cognitive science, especially cognitive psychology. In the course of this essay I can only give brief indications of how Kuhn's thinking and research in areas of cognitive science have been running along parallel lines and of how one might, through cognitive-historical analysis, create some intersecting lines.

In his Presidential Address to the Philosophy of Science Association, Kuhn expressed his abiding interest as being in “incommensurability and the nature of the conceptual divide between the developmental stages separated by … ‘scientific revolutions’” (Conant and Haugeland 2000, p. 228).

Type
Chapter
Information
Thomas Kuhn , pp. 178 - 211
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, H., Chen, X., and Barker, P.. 1996. “Kuhn's Mature Philosophy of Science and Cognitive Psychology.” Philosophical Psychology 9: 347–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, H., and Nersessian, N. J.. 2000. “Nomic Concepts, Frames, and Conceptual Change.” Philosophy of Science 67 (special Proceedings issue) S224–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, S. L., Gleitman, L., and Gleitman, H.. 1983. “What Some Concepts Might Not Be.” Cognition 13: 263–308CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, L. 1987. “The Instability of Graded Structure: Implications for the Nature of Concepts.” In: U. Neisser, ed. Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 101–40
Barsalou, L. 1992. “Frames, Concepts, and Conceptual Fields.” In: A. Lehrer and E. Kittay, eds. Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantical and Lexical Organization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 325–40
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P.. 1989. “Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning.” Educational Researcher 18: 32–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, S. 1985. Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Carey, S. 1991. “Knowledge Acquisition: Enrichment or Conceptual Change?” In: S. Carey and R. Gelman, eds. The Epigenesis of Mind: Essays on Biology and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 257–91
Carey, S., and Xu, Fei. 2001. “Infants' Knowledge of Objects: Beyond Files and Object Tracking.” Cognition 80: 179–213CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carey, S., and Smith, C.. 1993. “On Understanding the Nature of Scientific Knowledge.” Educational Psychologist 28: 235–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, N. 1983. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Clarendon Press
Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., and Gunstone, R. F.. 1982. “Cognitive Research and the Design of Science Instruction.” Educational Psychologist 17: 31–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X., Andersen, H., and Barker, P.. 1998. “Kuhn's Theory of Scientific Revolutions and Cognitive Psychology.” Philosophical Psychology 11: 5–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chi, M. T. H. 1992. “Conceptual Change Within and Across Ontological Categories; Examples from Learning and Discovery in Science.” In: R. Giere, ed. Cognitive Models of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 129–86
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., and Glaser, R.. 1981. “Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices.” Cognitive Science 5: 121–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clement, J. 1982. “Students' Preconceptions in Elementary Mechanics.” AJP 50: 66–71Google Scholar
Clement, J. 1983. “A Conceptual Model Discussed by Galileo and Used Intuitively by Physics Students.” In: D. Gentner and A. Stevens, ed. In Mental Models, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 325–40
Clement, J. 1989. “Learning Via Model Construction and Criticism.” In: G. Glover, R. Ronning and C. Reynolds, eds. Handbook of Creativity: Assessment, Theory, and Research. New York: Plenum, pp. 341–81
Collins, A., J. S. Brown, and P. Duguid. 1989. “Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Crafts of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics.” In: L. B. Resnick, ed. Knowing, Learning, and Instruction. Hillsdale: NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 453–94
Conant, James, and John Haugeland, eds. 2000. The Road Since Structure: Thomas S. Kuhn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Darden, L. 1980. “Theory Construction in Genetics.” In: T. Nickles, ed. Scientific Discovery: Case Studies. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 151–70
Darden, L. 1991. Theory Change in Science: Strategies from Mendelian Genetics. New York: Oxford University
DeKleer, J., and J. S. Brown. 1983. “Assumptions and Ambiguities in Mechanistic Mental Models.” In: D. G. A. Stevens, ed. Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 155–90
Driver, R., and Easley, J.. 1978. “Pupils and Paradigms: A Review of Literature Related to Concept Development in Adolescent Science Students.” Studies in Science Education 5: 61–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunbar, K. 1995. “How Scientists Really Reason: Scientific Reasoning in Real-World Laboratories.” In: R. J. Sternberg and J. E. Davidson, eds. The Nature of Insight. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 365–95
Dunbar, K. 1999. “How Scientists Build Models: In Vivo Science as a Window on the Scientific Mind.” In: L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian and P. Thagard, eds. Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, pp. 85–99
Gentner, D., and D. Gentner. 1983. “Flowing Waters and Teeming Crowds: Mental Models of Electricity.” In Gentner and Stevens, eds. (1983), pp. 99–129
Gentner, D., and Markman, A. B.. 1997. “Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity.” American Psychologist 52(1): 45–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gentner, D., and A. L. Stevens. 1983. Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Giere, R. N. 1988. Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Giere, R. N. ed., 1992. Cognitive Models of Science. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 15. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
Giere, R. N., 1994. “The Cognitive Structure of Scientific Theories.” Philosophy of Science 61: 276–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gooding, D. 1981. “Final Steps to the Field Theory: Faraday's Study of Electromagnetic Phenomena, 1845–1850.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11: 231–75CrossRef
Gooding, D. 1990. Experiment and the Making of Meaning: Human Agency in Scientific Observation and Experiment. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Gooding, D. 1992. “The Procedural Turn: Or Why Did Faraday's Thought Experiments Work?” In Giere (1992), pp. 45–76
Gopnik, Alison, and Andrew N. Meltzoff. 1997. Words, Thought, and Theories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Griesemer, J. R. 1991a. “Material Models in Biology.” In: PSA 1990. East Lansing, MI: PSA
Griesemer, J. R., 1991b. “Must Scientific Diagrams Be Eliminable? The Case of Path Analysis.” Biology and Philosophy 6: 177–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griesemer, J. R., and W. Wimsatt. 1989. “Picturing Weismannism: A Case Study of Conceptual Evolution.” In: M. Ruse, ed. What the Philosophy of Biology Is: Essays for David Hull. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 75–137
Halloun, I. A., and Hestenes, D.. 1985. “The Initial Knowledge State of College Physics Students.” AJP 53: 1043–55Google Scholar
Hegarty, M. 1992. “Mental Animation: Inferring Motion from Static Diagrams of Mechanical Systems.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18(5): 1084–1102Google ScholarPubMed
Hegarty, M., and Sims, V. K.. 1994. “Individual Differences in Mental Animation from Text and Diagrams.” Journal of Memory and Language 32: 411–30Google Scholar
Hegarty, M., and K. Steinhoff. 1994. “Use of Diagrams as External Memory in a Mechanical Reasoning Task.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans
Heider, E. Rosch. 1972. “Universals in Color Naming and Memory.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 93: 10–20 (See also Rosch, E.)CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holland, J. H., K. J. Holyoak, R. E. Nisbett, and P. R. Thagard. 1986. Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Holmes, F. L. 1981. “The Fine Structure of Scientific Creativity.” History of Science 19: 60–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holmes, F. L. 1985. Lavoisier and the Chemistry of Life: An Exploration of Scientific Creativity. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press
Hoyningen-Huene, P. 1993. Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Jiminez, Gomez E., and Fernendaz, E. Duran. 1998. “Didactic Problems in the Concept of Electrical Potential Difference and an Analysis of Philogenesis.” Science and Education 7: 129–41Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1983. Mental Models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Johnson-Laird, P. N. 1989. “Mental Models.” In: M. Posner, ed. Foundations of Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 469–500
Keil, F. C. 1991. “The Emergence of Theoretical Beliefs as Constraints on Concepts.” In: S. Carey and R. Gelman, eds. The Epigenesis of Mind: Essays on Biology and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 237–56
Kosslyn, S. M. 1980. Image and Mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Kosslyn, S. M. 1994. Image and Brain. Cambridge MA: MIT Press
Kuhn, T. S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Kuhn, T. S. 1977. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Kuhn, T. S. 1979. “Metaphor in Science.” In: A. Ortony, ed. Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 409–19
Kuhn, T. S., 1990. “The Road Since Structure. PSA 1990 2: 3–13Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. 1992. “The Trouble with the Historical Philosophy of Science.” Robert and Maurine Rothschild Lecture, Harvard University
Kuhn, T. S. 1993. “Afterwords.” In: P. Horwich, ed. World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 311–41
Latour, B. 1986. “Visualisation and Cognition: Thinking with Eyes and Hands.” Knowledge and Society 6: 1–40Google Scholar
Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Lynch, M., and S. Woolgar, eds. 1990. Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Magnani, L., N. J. Nersessian, and P. Thagard, eds. 1999. Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum
McCloskey, M. 1983. “Naive Theories of Motion.” In: D. Gentner and A. L. Stevens, eds. Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 229–33
McDermott, L. C. 1984. “Research on Conceptual Understanding in Mechanics.” Physics Today July: 24Google Scholar
Medin, D. L. 1989. “Concepts and Conceptual Structure.” American Psychologist 44: 1469–81CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, M. S., and M. Morrison, eds. 1999. Models as Mediators. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Morrow, D. G., Bower, G. H., and Greenspan, S. L.. 1989. “Updating Situation Models During Narrative Comprehension.” Journal of Memory and Language 28: 292–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. 1984a. “Aether/Or: The Creation of Scientific Concepts.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 15: 175–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J., 1984b. Faraday to Einstein: Constructing Meaning in Scientific Theories. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Kluwer Academic
Nersessian, N. J. 1985. “Faraday's Field Concept.” In: D. C. Gooding and F. A. J. L. James, eds. Faraday Rediscovered: Essays on the Life and Work of Michael Faraday. London: Macmillan, pp. 377–406
Nersessian, N. J. 1988. “Reasoning from Imagery and Analogy in Scientific Concept Formation.” In: A. Fine and J. Leplin, eds. PSA 1988. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 41–8
Nersessian, N. J., 1989. “Conceptual Change in Science and in Science Education.” Synthese 80 (Special Issue: Philosophy of Science and Science Education): 163–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. 1992a. “Constructing and Instructing: The Role of ‘Abstraction Techniques’ in Developing and Teaching Scientific Theories.” In: R. Duschl and R. Hamilton, eds. Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Science, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany: SUNY Press, pp. 48–68
Nersessian, N. J. 1992b. “How Do Scientists Think? Capturing the Dynamics of Conceptual Change in Science.” In: Giere (1992), pp. 3–44
Nersessian, N. J. 1992c. “In the Theoretician's Laboratory: Thought Experimenting as Mental Modeling.” In: D. Hull, M. Forbes, and K. Okruhlik, eds. PSA 1992. East Lansing, MI: PSA, pp. 291–301
Nersessian, N. J. 1995a. “The Cognitive Sciences and the History of Science.” Paper presented at the Conference on Critical Problems and Research Frontiers in History of Science and Technology, Madison, WI
Nersessian, N. J. 1995b. “Opening the Black Box: Cognitive Science and the History of Science. Osiris 10 (Constructing Knowledge in the History of Science, A. Thackray, ed.): 194–211
Nersessian, N. J. 1995c. Should Physicists Preach What They Practice? Constructive Modeling in Doing and Learning Physics. “Science & Education 4: 203–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. in press-a. “Abstraction Via Generic Modeling in Concept Formation in Science.” Mind and Society. In: M. R. Jones and N. Cartwright, eds
Nersessian, N. J. in press-b. “Maxwell and the ‘Method of Physical Analogy.’” In: D. Malament, ed. Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science and Mathematics to Honor Howard Stein on his 70th Birthday. LaSalle, IL: Open Court
Nersessian, N. J., and L. B. Resnick. 1989. “Comparing Historical and Intuitive Explanations of Motion: Does ‘Naive Physics’ Have a Structure?” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Ann Arbor, MI
Nickles, T. 1998. “Kuhn, Historical Philosophy of Science, and Case-Based Reasoning.” Configurations 6: 51–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrig, W., and Kintsch, W.. 1985. “Propositional and Situational Representations of Text.” Journal of Memory and Language 24: 503–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. 2001. Visual indexes, preconceptual objects and situated vision. Cognition 80: 127–58CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosch, E. 1987. “Wittgenstein and Categorization Research in Cognitive Psychology.” In: M. Chapman and R. A. Dixon, eds. Meaning and the Growth of Understanding: Wittgenstein's Significance for Developmental Psychology. Berlin: Springer, pp. 151–66. (See also Heider, E.)
Rosch, E., and Mervis, C. B.. 1975. “Family Resemblance Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories.” Cognitive Psychology 7: 573–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1976. “The Emergence of a Visual Language for Geological Science.” History of Science 14: 149–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, D. L., and Black, J. B.. 1996. “Analog Imagery in Mental Model Reasoning: Depictive Models.” Cognitive Psychology 30: 154–219CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shelley, C. 1996. “Visual Abductive Reasoning in Archeology.” Philosophy of Science 63: 278–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepard, R. N., and L. A. Cooper. 1982. Mental Images and Their Transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Smith, C., Snir, J., and Grosslight, L.. 1992. “Using Conceptual Models to Facilitate Conceptual Change: The Case of Weight–Density Differentiation.” Cognition and Instruction 9: 221–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, E. E., and D. L. Medin. 1981. Concepts and Categories. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Spelke, E. S., Phillips, A., and Woodward, A. L.. 1995. “Spatio-Temporal Continuity, Smoothness of Motion and Object Identity in Infancy.” British Journal of Developmental Psychology 13: 113–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, P. 1991. “Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press
Trumpler, M. 1997. Converging Images: Techniques of Intervention and Forms of Representation of Sodium-Channel Proteins in Nerve Cell Membranes. Journal of the History of Biology 20: 55–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tweney, R. D. 1985. “Faraday's Discovery of Induction: A Cognitive Approach.” In: D. Gooding and F. A. J. L. James, eds. Faraday Rediscovered. New York: Stockton Press, pp. 189–201
Tweney, R. D. 1987. “What Is Scientific Thinking?” Unpublished manuscript
Tweney, R. D., 1992. “Stopping Time: Faraday and the Scientific Creation of Perceptual Order.” Physis 29: 149–64Google Scholar
Viennot, L. 1979. “Spontaneous Reasoning in Elementary Dynamics.” European Journal of Science Education 1: 205–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, D. 1980. Sameness and Substance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Wiser, M. 1995. “Use of History of Science to Understand and Remedy Students' Misconceptions about Time and Temperature.” In: D. Perkins, ed. Software Goes to School. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–38
Wittgenstein, L. 1968. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. New York: Macmillan
Woods, D. D. 1995. “Towards a Theoretical Base for Representation Design in the Computer Medium: Ecological Perception and Aiding Human Cognition.” In: J. Flach, P. Hanosok, J. Caird, and K. Vicente, eds., Global Perspectives on the Ecology of Human–Machine Systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 157–88

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×