Millikan’s consistency testers and the cultural evolution of concepts
Ruth Millikan has hypothesised that human cognition contains ‘consistency testers’. Consistency testers check whether
different judgements a thinker makes about the same subject matter agree or conflict. Millikan’s suggestion is that, where the same concept
has been applied to the world via two routes, and the two judgements that result are found to be inconsistent, that makes the thinker less
inclined to apply those concepts in those ways in the future.
If human cognition does indeed include such a capacity, its operation will be an important determinant of how people use
concepts. It will have a major impact on which concepts they deploy and which means of application (conceptions) they rely on. Since
consistency testers are a selection mechanism at the heart of conceptual thinking, they would be crucial to understanding how concepts are
selected – why some are retained and proliferate and others die out. Hence, whether consistency testers for concepts exist, and how they
operate, is an important question for those seeking to understand the cultural evolution of concepts, and of the words we use to express
them.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Millikan’s hypothesis
- 3.Consistency testers characterised
- 4.Metacognitive role
- 5.Objections
- 6.Evidence
- 7.Role in the evolution of concepts and language
- 8.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (48)
Ackerman, R., & Thompson, V. A.
(
2017)
Meta-Reasoning: Monitoring and Control of Thinking and Reasoning.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences,
21
1, 607–17.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Astuti, R., & Harris, P. L.
(
2008)
Understanding Mortality and the Life of the Ancestors in Rural Madagascar.
Cognitive Science,
32
1, 713–40.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dawkins, R.
(
1976)
The Selfish Gene. Oxford: O.U.P.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Doyle, M. E., & Hourihan, K. L.
(
2016)
Metacognitive Monitoring During Category Learning: How Success Affects Future Behaviour.
Memory,
24
1, 1197–207.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eglington, L. G., & Kang, S. H. K.
(
2017)
Interleaved Presentation Benefits Science Category Learning.
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition,
6
1, 475–85.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Eslami, SM Ali, Danilo Jimenez Rezende, Frederic Besse, Fabio Viola, Ari S Morcos, Marta Garnelo, Avraham Ruderman, Andrei A Rusu, Ivo Danihelka, and Karol Gregor
2018 Neural scene representation and rendering.
Science, 360 (6394), 1204–1210.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fernandez Cruz, A. L., Arango-Munoz, S. & Volz, K. G.
(
2016)
Oops, Scratch That! Monitoring One’s Own Errors During Mental Calculation.
Cognition,
146
1, 110–20.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friston, K. J., & Stephan, K. E.
(
2007)
Free-Energy and the Brain.
Synthese,
159
1, 417–58.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Godfrey-Smith, P.
(
2013)
Signals, Icons, and Beliefs. In
D. Ryder,
J. Kingsbury &
K. Williford (Eds.),
Millikan and Her Critics (pp. 41–58). Oxford / Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Guilbeault, D., Baronchelli, A., & Centola, D.
(
2021)
Experimental Evidence for Scale-Induced Category Convergence across Populations.
Nature Communications,
12
1, 327.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hamm, J. P., Johnson, B. W., & Kirk, I. J.
(
2002)
Comparison of the N300 and N400 Erps to Picture Stimuli in Congruent and Incongruent Contexts.
Clinical neurophysiology,
113
1, 1339–50.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hartwig, M. K., & Dunlosky, J.
(
2017)
Category Learning Judgments in the Classroom: Can Students Judge How Well They Know Course Topics? Contemporary Educational Psychology,
49
1, 80–90.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., & Coane, J. H.
(
2010)
Test-Enhanced Learning of Natural Concepts: Effects on Recognition Memory, Classification, and Metacognition.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
36
1, 1441.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., & Potapenko, A.
(
2021)
Highly Accurate Protein Structure Prediction with Alphafold.
Nature,
596
(7873), 583–589.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koriat, A.
(
1997)
Monitoring One’s Own Knowledge During Study: A Cue-Utilization Approach to Judgments of Learning.
Journal of Experimental psychology: General,
126
1, 349.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koriat, A.
(
2011)
Subjective Confidence in Perceptual Judgments: A Test of the Self-Consistency Model.
Journal of Experimental psychology: General,
140
1:, 117–39.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koriat, A.
(
2012a)
The Self-Consistency Model of Subjective Confidence.
Psychological Review,
119
1, 80–113.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koriat, A.
(
2012b)
The Subjective Confidence in One’s Knowledge and Judgments: Some Metatheoretical Considerations. In
M. J. Beran,
J. L. Brandl,
J. Perner, &
J. Proust (Eds.),
The Foundations of Metacognition (pp. 213–33). Oxford / New York: OUP.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koriat, A.
(
2012c)
The Relationships between Monitoring, Regulation and Performance.
Learning and Instruction,
22
1, 296–98.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A.
(
2008)
Learning Concepts and Categories: Is Spacing the “Enemy of Induction”? Psychological Science,
19
1. 585–92.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kornell, N., Castel, A. D., Eich, T. S., & Bjork, R. A.
(
2010)
Spacing as the Friend of Both Memory and Induction in Young and Older Adults.
Psychology and aging,
25
1, 498.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krizhevsky, Alex, Ilya Sutskever, and Geoffrey E Hinton
2012 Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25, edited by
F. Pereira,
C.J.C. Burges,
L. Bottou and
K.Q. Weinberger, 1097–1105. New York: Curran Associates, Inc.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D.
(
2011)
Thirty Years and Counting: Finding Meaning in the N400 Component of the Event-Related Brain Potential (Erp).
Annual review of psychology,
62
1, 621–47.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Legare, C. H., & Shtulman, A.
(
2018)
Explanatory Pluralism across Cultures and Development. In
J. Proust &
M. Fortier (Eds.),
Metacogntive Diverisity: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Oxford: OUP.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martinez, M.
(
2013)
Teleosemantics and Productivity.
Philosophical Psychology,
26
1, 47–68.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Millikan, R. G.
(
1984)
Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Millikan, R. G.
(
1989)
Biosemantics.
Journal of Philosophy,
86
1, 281–97.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Millikan, R. G.
(
2000)
On Clear and Confused Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Millikan, R. G.
(
2017)
Beyond Concepts: Unicepts, Language, and Natural Information. Oxford / New York: OUP.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Millikan, R. G.
(
2022)
Self-Signs and Intensional Contexts.
Mind & Language: 1–19.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Morehead, K., Dunlosky, J. & Foster, N. L.
(
2017)
Do People Use Category-Learning Judgments to Regulate Their Learning of Natural Categories? Memory & Cognition,
45
1, 1253–69.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L.
(
1990)
Metamemory: A Theoretical Framework and New Findings. In
M. Bowerman (Ed.),
The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (pp. 125–73). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press, Inc..
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Polich, J.
(
2007)
Updating P300: An Integrative Theory of P3a and P3b.
Clinical neurophysiology,
118
1, 2128–48.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proust, J.
(
2008)
Epistemic Agency and Metacognition: An Externalist View.
Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society,
108
1, 241–68.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proust, J.
(
2012a)
The Norms of Acceptance.
Philosophical Issues,
22
1, 316–33.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proust, J.
(
2012b)
Metacognition and Mindreading: One or Two Functions? In
M. J. Beran,
J. L. Brandl,
J. Perner &
J. Proust (Eds.),
Foundations of Metacognition (pp. 234–51). Oxford: OUP.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proust, J.
(
2013a)
The Philosophy of Metacognition: Mental Agency and Self-Awareness. Oxford University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Proust, J.
(
2013b) “
Mental Acts as Natural Kinds”. In
Vierkant, ed,
Decomposing the Will. Oxford / New York: OUP, 262–82.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rawson, K. A., Thomas, R. C., & Jacoby, L. L.
(
2015)
The Power of Examples: Illustrative Examples Enhance Conceptual Learning of Declarative Concepts.
Educational Psychology Review,
27
1, 483–504.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rupert, R. D.
(
1999)
Mental Representations and Millikan’s Theory of Intentional Content: Does Biology Chase Causality? The Southern journal of philosophy,
37
1, 113–40.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Shea, N.
(
in submission)
Metacognition of Inferential Transitions.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sperber, D., Clement, F., Heintz, C., Mascaro, O., Mercier, H., Origgi, G., & Wilson, D.
(
2010)
Epistemic Vigilance.
Mind & Language,
25
1, 359–93.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thompson, V. A., & Johnson, S. C.
(
2014)
Conflict, Metacognition, and Analytic Thinking.
Thinking & Reasoning,
20
1, 215–44.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thorne, S. R., Quilty-Dunn, J., Smortchkova, J., Shea, N., & Hampton, J. A.
(
2021)
Concept Appraisal.
Cognitive Science,
45
1, e12978.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thorne, S. R., Smortchkova, J., Quilty-Dunn, J., Shea, N., & Hampton, J. A.
(
2022)
Is Concept Appraisal Modulated by Procedural or Declarative Manipulations? Frontiers in Psychology,
13
1, 774629.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wahlheim, C. N., Dunlosky, J. & Jacoby, L. L.
(
2011)
Spacing Enhances the Learning of Natural Concepts: An Investigation of Mechanisms, Metacognition, and Aging.
Memory & Cognition,
39
1, 750–63.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wahlheim, C. N., Finn, B. & Jacoby, L. L.
(
2012)
Metacognitive Judgments of Repetition and Variability Effects in Natural Concept Learning: Evidence for Variability Neglect.
Memory and Cognition,
40
1, 703–16.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yan, V. X., Ligon Bjork, E. & Bjork, R. A.
(
2016)
On the Difficulty of Mending Metacognitive Illusions: A Priori Theories, Fluency Effects, and Misattributions of the Interleaving Benefit.
Journal of Experimental psychology: General,
145
1, 918.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Proust, Joëlle
2023.
Affordances from a control viewpoint.
Philosophical Psychology ► pp. 1 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.