Mike, having helped construct a classroom in southern India, I can tell you that drywall was never a consideration. The building was bricks that were made down the road. In the cities, the buildings were made from concrete with steel support beams. Again, no drywall on the inside. Thus, tacks don't work, not even in "modern construction", which by Indian standards is a far cry from anything that might be constructed in Manhattan. Thus I think the term "modern construction" is a rather geocentric term. Or some type of centric.
Carol On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:53 AM, Mike Palij <[email protected]> wrote: > A few points: > > (1) Regarding robins: Whenever I cover Eleanor Rosch's work > on the structure of categories, I emphasize that the prototype is > the most representative example of a category or the modal > instance of the category (i.e., the instance that one has experienced > most often) and THAT depends upon one's experience. The > degree to which different people will have the prototype or not > will depend upon how similar or different their developmental > histories and environments have been. One readily finds that > US regional differences readily produce systematic differences > in prototype (e.g., ask what is prototypical soft drink or, as > we say in the northeast "soda"). If you have students from the > Caribbean or Latin America, you'll see systematic differences > in prototypes as well. One does not have to go India to > discover this nor use "European-American Centrism" as an > explanation. > > For the category of birds, I take pains to point out that "Robin" > was found because that was a commonly experience bird of > Rosch's SAMPLE. I go on to point out that since I grew up in > NYC and if ever saw a robin, it might have a stuff one in the > Museum of Natural History, thus, my prototype is a pigeon. > Similarly, for other categories, one's experience will define > what the prototype or exemplar might be (e.g., I believe in the > U.S., bananas appear to be a reported prototype but, of course, > if one grew up in situation where one never had experience > with bananas, the banana would not be their prototype, instead, > it would be whatever their most commonly experienced instance > of a fruit was -- ask people who grew up in apple growing areas > what their fruit prototype is). > . > The main point I want to make is that using a robin for an > example of a prototype is hardly a "European-American > centrism" but a developmental-experiential one. Clearly, > since my prototype for a bird is not a robin but a pigeon, > this can't be due to "European-American" centrism, instead > it can be characterized either as a "urban vs suburban or > rural" distinction. With respect to Rosch's theory, the point > is not that everyone has the SAME prototype but that one > develops a prototype from experience. I think bringing > European-American centrism as a concept, along with all > of its baggage, distracts from the main issue which is > understanding Rosch's theory. > > (2) I think you confuse things in the Duncker candle problem. > First, modern construction does NOT use concrete in all walls -- > that is why God created drywall. The current method of putting > up a "modern" building (usually >= 6 floors) is to pour concrete > for the floors and pillars and leave the rest of the area clear > except for the few supporting walls. When the main construction > is done, aluminum studs are put into place and drywall is screwed > into the studs (a remarkable number of such building are going > up in my area of Manhattan, including a dormitory for the Cooper > Union college). Anyone who has experience with drywall knows > that it is easy to penetrate and damage -- sticking pushpins into > it should not be too difficult. Now, if your students live in low level > building made out of cinder blocks, (a) that is hardly a modern > construction (indeed, it substitutes cinderblocks for bricks, > a technique that goes back thousands of years when "bricks > were made of mud, straw, and other materials), and (b) given > that Duncker did the research back in the 1930s, isn't the > real problem your students have is "presentism", that is, > thinking and interpreting past situations in terms of current day > terms? Perhaps having the students read Duncker's article > (translated into English for the non-German reading hordes) > might be good for them; see: > > Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving (L. S. Lees, Trans.). > Psychological Monographs, 58(5), i-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0093599 > > A look at the Wikipedia entry wouldn't hurt; see: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candle_problem > As well as the research published by Sam Glucksberg (mentioned > in the Wiki entry, easily located in PsycInfo) might also be useful. > > Finally, I suggest the following: > German, T. P., & Barrett, H. C.. (2005). Functional Fixedness in a > Technologically Sparse Culture. Psychological Science, 16(1), 1-5. > > Here is the abstract: > |ABSTRACT: Problem solving can be inefficient when the > |solution requires subjects to generate an atypical function > |for an object and the object's typical function has been > |primed. Subjects become "fixed" on the design function of > |the object, and problem solving suffers relative to control > |conditions in which the object's function is not demonstrated. > |In the current study, such functional fixedness > |was demonstrated in a sample of adolescents (mean age of > |16 years) among the Shuar of Ecuadorian Amazonia, > |whose technologically sparse culture provides limited access > |to large numbers of artifacts with highly specialized > |functions. This result suggests that design function may > |universally be the core property of artifact concepts in > |human semantic memory. > > In the above study they don't use the candle problem but equivalent > situations. Now, it is possible that your student's experience makes > the classic Duncker problem harder for them to understand, > both in terms of what is going on and its theoretical significance. > But that hardly has to do with "European-American centrism" > as the German & Barrett study shows. > > -Mike Palij > New York University > [email protected] > > > ------ Original Message ------ > On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 04:06:06 -0800, Annette Taylor wrote: > Several people have asked me backchannel to post a bit about teaching in > India. > I have not gotten around to it because basically I am always too > overwhelmed by > just about everything to get around to posting something. > > So I thought I'd post a bit about Euro/American-centrism in teaching and > textbooks. > > First of all, all of my students are fluent in English--most consider > themselves native English speakers as they spoke English at home growing > up and > as they tell me, "we think in English!" it is NOT a second language! And > they > speak with that wonderfully melodic Indian English :) But, of course, > they are > all equally fluent in Hindi. > > Because I'm always a bit rushed (I'd like to take a walk in that short > window > of time each day between dusk and dark, hot and chilly, too smoky/polluted > and > sort of OK to at least walk in) this will be brief. > > Two things that stuck out this week in my cognitive class: > (1) talking about semantic networks--hierarchical and networks models: my > textbook, an American textbook as they are no Indian cognitive psychology > textbooks that are quite as comprehensive as the US ones, used a common US > example: the robin. A robin is a bird. A robin has a red breast. A robin > lays > small blue eggs, etc. The students had no clue what a robin is. They had no > idea if it was true or false that it has a red breast or lays small blue > eggs. > We defaulted to crows and pigeons in our discussions. My exam item I just > wrote > is about crows :) > > (2) Problem solving: Duncker's candle problem. I have a text-associated > image > of a box of matches, a box of candles, a box of tacks, scotch tape, a > thimble. > I put it up and asked "What can we toss aside?" Of course the thimble and > the > tacks! HUH? you might say? Well, their only experience with modern > construction > is that the walls are all made of solid concrete. How are you going to > stick a > tack into solid concrete? The tape will have to do, even if it keeps coming > away from the weight of the candle. (Heard among students exiting, "stupid > problem these people came with!".....) > > And that, boys and girls, is but a teensy weensy glimpse into the > Euro/American > centric world of textbook publishing and teaching :) > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=177920.a45340211ac7929163a0216244443341&n=T&l=tips&o=47426 > or send a blank email to > leave-47426-177920.a45340211ac7929163a0216244443...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > -- Carol DeVolder, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology St. Ambrose University 518 West Locust Street Davenport, Iowa 52803 563-333-6482 --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=47429 or send a blank email to leave-47429-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
