El conocimiento se organiza en la memoria en forma de esquemas, estructuras de datos que representan los conceptos genéricos. Estos esquemas tienen variables, pueden encajarse uno dentro de otro, varían en sus niveles de abstracción y representan un conocimiento asociado a conceptos. Son las unidades clave de los procesos de comprensión, almacenamiento y recuperación de la información. También son necesarios para establecer inferencias, como predictores de estímulos no observados, y en el razonamiento analógico. El conocimiento subyacente para la realización de acciones lo constituyen los esquemas de acción, que son subesquemas de un esquema más complejo. Existen dos mecanismos para producir y modificar esquemas: la especialización y la generalización, y ambos pueden ser considerados como tipos de aprendizaje. Los procesos de búsqueda y activación de un esquema pueden ser conducidos por datos, o conducidos conceptualmente.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonJ. R.BowerG.Human associative memory Washington, D. C. Winston1973.
2.
AndersonR. C.OrtonyA.On putting apples into bottles—A problem of polysemyCognitive Psychology, 1975, 7, 167–180.
3.
AusubelD. P.The psychology of meaningful verbal learning: An introduction to school learning.Nueva York: Crune & Stratton, 1963.
4.
BarclayJ. R.BransfordJ. D.FranksJ. J.MccarrellN. S.NitschK.Comprehension and semantic flexibility.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1974, 13, 471–481.
5.
BaetlettF. C.Remembering. Cambridge, Inglaterra: Cambridge University Press, 1932.
6.
BobrowD. G.NormanD. A.Some principles of memory schemata. EnBobrowD. G.CollinsA. M. (Eds.), Representation and understanding: Studies in cognitive science.Nueva-York: Academic Press, 1975.
7.
CharniakE.Toward a model of children's story comprehension. Tesis doctoral inédita. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1972. (MIT Artificial Inteligence Laboratory Tech. Rep. AI-TR, 266, 1972.)
8.
CharniakE.Organization and inference in a frame-like system of common sense knowledge. En las Actas deTheoretical issues in natural language processing: An interdisciplinary workshop. Cambridge, Mass.: Bolt, Beranek, & Newman, Inc., 1975. Pp. 42–51.
9.
ClarkH. H.Comprehension and the given-newcontract. Comunicación presentada en una conferencia sobre «The role of grammar in interdisciplinary linguistic research» University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany, diciembre 1973.
10.
CollinsA. M.QuillianM. R.Retrieval time from semantic memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1969, 8, 240–247.
11.
CollinsA. M.WarnockE.H.AielloN.MillerM. L.Reasoning from incomplete knowledge. EnBobrowD. G.CollinsA. M. (Eds.), Representation and understanding: Studies in cognitive science.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1975.
12.
CraikF. I. M.LockhartR. S.Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, 11, 671–684.
13.
FilmoreC.The case for case. EnBachE.HarmsR. I. (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory.Nueva York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1968.
14.
GentnerD.Evidence for the psychological reality of semantic components: The verbs of possession. EnNormanD. A.RumelhartD. E.LNR Research Group, Explorations in cognition.San Francisco: Freeman, 1975.
15.
HalffH. M.OrtonyA.AndersonR. C.A context-sensitive representation of word meanings.Memory and Cognition, en prensa.
16.
HewittC.Stereotypes as an ACTOR approach towards solving the problem of procedural attachment in FRAME theories. EnProceedings of Theoretical issues in natural language processing: An interdisciplinary workshop.Cambridge, Mass: Bolt, Beranek, & Newman, Inc., 1975.
17.
JohnsonM. K.BransfordJ. D.SolomonS. K.Memory for tacit implications of sentencesJournal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 98, 203–205.
18.
KantE.Critique of pure reason (1st ed. 1781, 2nd ed. 1787, translated by N. Kemp Smith). Londres: Macmillan, 1963.
19.
KintschW.Notes on the structure of semantic memory. EnTulvingE.DonaldsonW. (Eds.), Organization of memory.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1972.
20.
LabovW.The boundaries of words and their meanings. EnBaileyC. J.ShuyR. (Eds.), New ways of analyzing in English. Washington, D. C.:. Georgetown University Press, 1973.
21.
LakoffG.Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting. Chicago Linguistics Society.Chicago: University of Chicago Linguistics Department, 1972.
22.
MeyerB. J. F.The organization of prose and its effects on memory.Amsterdam: North-Holland Publ., 1975.
23.
MeyerB. J. F.McconkieG. W.What is recalled after hearing a passage?Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973, 65, 109–117.
24.
MinskyM. Aframework for representing knowledge. EnWinstonP. H. (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision.Nueva York: McGraw-Hill, 1975.
25.
NormanD. A.Resources and schemas replace stages of processing. Comunicación presentada en el Sixteenth Annual Meeting, The Psychonomic Society, Denver, Colorado, noviembre 1975.
26.
NormanD. A.RumelhartD. E.& the LNR Research Group.Explorations in cognition.San Francisco: Freeman, 1975.
27.
OrtonyA.How episodic is semantic memory? En las actas deTheoretical issues in natural language processing: An interdisciplinary workshop.Cambridge, Mass: Bolt Beranek & Newman, Inc., 1975. (a)
28.
OrtonyA.Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice.Educational Theory, 1975, 25, 45–53. (b)
29.
PalmerS. E.Visual perception and world knowledge: Notes on a model of sensory cognitive interaction. EnNormanD. A.RumelhartD. E.LNR Research Group, Explorations in cognition, San Francisco: Freeman, 1975.
30.
PetrieH. G.Action, perception and education.Educational Theory, 1974, 24, 33–45.
31.
PolanyiM.Personal knowledge.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958.
RipsL. J.ShobenE. J.SmithE. E.Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973, 12, 1–20.
36.
RoschE. H.On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. EnMooreT. E. (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1973.
37.
RumelhartD. E.Notes on a schema for stories. EnBobrowD. G.CollinsA. M. (Eds.), Representation and understanding: Studies in cognitive science.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1975.
38.
RumelhartD. E.Understanding and summarizing brief stories. EnLa BergeD.SamuelsS. J. (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1977. (a)
39.
RumelhartD. E.Toward an interactive model of reading. EnDornicS. (Ed.), Attention and performance, VI.Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1977. (b)
40.
RumelhartD. E.LevinJ. A.A language comprehension system. EnNormanD. A.RumelhartD. E.LNR Research Group, Explorations in cognition.San Francisco: Freeman, 1975.
41.
RumelhartD. E.LindsayP. H.NormanD. A.A process model for long-term memory. EnTulvingE.DonaldsonW. (Eds.), Organization of memory.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1972.
42.
SchankR. C.Conceptual dependency: A theory of natural language understandings.Cognitive Psychology, 1972, 3, 552–631.
43.
SchankR. C.the yaleA. I.Project.SAM—A story understands (Res. Rep. 43).New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, agosto 1975.
44.
SchankR. C.AbelsonR. P.Scripts, plans and knowledge. EnAdvance Papers of the Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial inteligence. Tbilisi, Georgia, USSR, 1975, Pp. 151–157.
45.
SchmidtR. A.A schema theory of discrete motor skill learning.Psychological Review, 1975, 82, 225–260.
46.
SpiroR. J.Inferential reconstruction in memory for connected discours (Tech. Rep. No. 2). Urbana, III.: Laboratory for Cognitive Studies in Education, University of Illinois, 1975.
47.
TulvingE.Episodic and semantic memory. EnTulvingE.DonaldsonW. (Eds.), Organization of memory.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1972.
48.
TulvingE.ThomsonD. M.Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory.Psychological Review, 1973, 80, 352–373.
49.
WalkerJ. H.Real-world variability, reasonableness judgments, and memory representatios for concepts.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1975, 14, 241–252.
50.
WinogradT.Understanding natural language.Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1972.
51.
WinogradT.Frame representations and the declarative procedural controversy. EnBobrowD. G.CollinsA. M. (Eds.). Representatios and understanding: Studies in cognitive science.Nueva York: Academic Press, 1975.
