THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE

Theoretical and Conceptual Knowledge

Abstract

The human conceptual system contains knowledge that supports all cognitive activities, including perception, memory, language and thought. According to most current theories, states in modality-specific systems for perception, action and emotion do not represent knowledge - rather, re-descriptions of these states in modal representational languages do. Increasingly, however, researchers report that re-enactments of states in modality-specific systems underlie conceptual processing. In behavioral experiments, perceptual and motor variables consistently produce effects in conceptual tasks. In brain imaging experiments, conceptual processing consistently activates modality-specific brain areas. Theoretical research shows how modality-specific re-enactments could produce basic conceptual functions, such as the type-token distinction, categorical inference, productivity, propositions and abstract concepts. Together these empirical results and theoretical analyses implicate modality-specific systems in the representation and use of conceptual knowledge.

Table of Content

Introduction4

Part 14

Part 25

Concepts and Categorization6

Reasoning: Deduction and Induction8

Deduction9

Part 310

Theoretical issues10

Computational power10

Attention and integration10

Simulators and simulations11

Conclusion13

References14

Theoretical and Conceptual Knowledge

Introduction

Researchers develop theory that is supported by justifiable evidence. In doing so, researchers across the social, physical, and life sciences seek conceptual and theoretical understanding, pose empirically testable and refutable hypotheses, design studies that test and can rule out competing counter-hypotheses, use observational methods linked to theory that enable other scientists to verify their accuracy, and recognize the importance of both independent replication and generalization. Research is highly demanding and difficult to do. The very act of collecting and analyzing data is not as important as the persistence and consternation of thinking critically and deeply about a phenomenon. This is the highest level of art and skill one can use to better understand difficult problems through science. If science is competent inquiry that produces warranted assertions, then researchers need conceptually strong arguments that are grounded previous studies and theoretical assumptions.

Part 1

Among the most important scientific principles that guide scientists, it is not in collecting and analyzing data. Rather, it is being able to pose significant questions that can be investigated empirically, linking research to relevant theory, and providing a coherent and explicit chain of reasoning. According to Camp (2001), “In general, a major stumbling block for many researchers in conceptualizing research is the development of an adequate theoretical framework for a study. Equally daunting is the problem of verbalizing the theoretical framework for the purposes of publication in the research literature.” The definitions of conceptual and theoretical frameworks are unclear and sometimes intertwined.

Warmbrod (1986) stated, "I am assuming that we agree that a theoretical/conceptual framework can be defined as a systematic ordering of ideas about the phenomena being investigated or as a systematic account of the relations among a set of variables" (p. 2). Moreover, “The two terms - 'conceptual framework' and 'theoretical framework' - are likely the two most misunderstood and misused terms in agricultural education research today. As such, the two terms are often erroneously interchanged”.

Camp (2001) defined the difference between conceptual and theoretical frameworks. A conceptual framework is a structure of what has been learned to best explain the natural progression of a phenomenon ...