↓ Skip to main content

Embodied Cognition is Not What you Think it is

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
12 blogs
twitter
224 X users
facebook
25 Facebook pages
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
12 Google+ users
reddit
2 Redditors
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
503 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1314 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Embodied Cognition is Not What you Think it is
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00058
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew D. Wilson, Sabrina Golonka

Abstract

The most exciting hypothesis in cognitive science right now is the theory that cognition is embodied. Like all good ideas in cognitive science, however, embodiment immediately came to mean six different things. The most common definitions involve the straight-forward claim that "states of the body modify states of the mind." However, the implications of embodiment are actually much more radical than this. If cognition can span the brain, body, and the environment, then the "states of mind" of disembodied cognitive science won't exist to be modified. Cognition will instead be an extended system assembled from a broad array of resources. Taking embodiment seriously therefore requires both new methods and theory. Here we outline four key steps that research programs should follow in order to fully engage with the implications of embodiment. The first step is to conduct a task analysis, which characterizes from a first person perspective the specific task that a perceiving-acting cognitive agent is faced with. The second step is to identify the task-relevant resources the agent has access to in order to solve the task. These resources can span brain, body, and environment. The third step is to identify how the agent can assemble these resources into a system capable of solving the problem at hand. The last step is to test the agent's performance to confirm that agent is actually using the solution identified in step 3. We explore these steps in more detail with reference to two useful examples (the outfielder problem and the A-not-B error), and introduce how to apply this analysis to the thorny question of language use. Embodied cognition is more than we think it is, and we have the tools we need to realize its full potential.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 224 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,314 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 20 2%
United Kingdom 13 <1%
Germany 11 <1%
Netherlands 7 <1%
Brazil 6 <1%
France 4 <1%
Canada 4 <1%
Switzerland 4 <1%
Portugal 3 <1%
Other 26 2%
Unknown 1216 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 285 22%
Student > Master 194 15%
Researcher 155 12%
Student > Bachelor 107 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 95 7%
Other 291 22%
Unknown 187 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 427 32%
Social Sciences 124 9%
Neuroscience 77 6%
Computer Science 72 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 57 4%
Other 320 24%
Unknown 237 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 307. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 May 2024.
All research outputs
#114,163
of 25,824,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#225
of 34,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#625
of 291,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#15
of 967 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,824,818 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 291,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 967 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.