Citation

Horowitz LM, Turan B. Psychol. Rev. 2008; 115(4): 1054-1068.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2130, USA. lenh@stanford.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2008, American Psychological Association)

DOI

10.1037/a0013122

PMID

18954214

Abstract

This article concerns individual differences in the associative meaning of psychological concepts. Associative meaning may be assessed with prototype methodology, which yields a list of features of the concept ordered according to their rated importance. Our theory concerns individual differences in a concept's associative meaning: A personal template reveals a person's idiosyncratic associative meaning. It is possible to assess the degree to which a personal template matches the corresponding prototype. The theory distinguishes among three types of concepts. One type, for example, specifies a particular behavior to be predicted, for example, a person who is likely to commit suicide, and features of the prototype would include predictors of suicidal behavior. According to the theory, the most prototypical features are (under specifiable conditions) valid predictors, and people with a strong template-to-prototype match possess more valid knowledge about the concept than do people with a weak template-to-prototype match. Other types of concepts cannot be validated (e.g., those describing subjective experiences). In that case, a strong template-to-prototype match does not reflect a person's degree of valid knowledge. The authors provide three applications of the theory.

Language: en