TY - JOUR
T1 - Why the designer's intended function is central for proper function assignment and artifact conceptualization
T2 - Essentialist and normative accounts
AU - Chaigneau, Sergio E.
AU - Puebla, Guillermo
AU - Canessa, Enrique C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2016/9/1
Y1 - 2016/9/1
N2 - People tend to think that the function intended by an artifact's designer is its real or proper function. Relatedly, people tend to classify artifacts according to their designer's intended function (DIF), as opposed to an alternative opportunistic function. This centrality of DIF has been shown in children from 6 years of age to adults, and it is not restricted to Western societies. We review four different explanations for the centrality of DIF, integrating developmental and adult data. Two of these explanations are essentialist accounts (causal and intentional essentialism). Two of them are normative accounts (conventional function and idea ownership). Though essentialist accounts have been very influential, we review evidence that shows their limitations. Normative accounts have been less predominant. We review evidence to support them, and discuss how they account for the data. In particular, we review evidence suggesting that the centrality of DIF can be explained as a case of idea ownership. This theory makes sense of a great deal of the existing data on the subject, reconciles contradictory results, links this line of work to other literatures, and offers an account of the observed developmental trend.
AB - People tend to think that the function intended by an artifact's designer is its real or proper function. Relatedly, people tend to classify artifacts according to their designer's intended function (DIF), as opposed to an alternative opportunistic function. This centrality of DIF has been shown in children from 6 years of age to adults, and it is not restricted to Western societies. We review four different explanations for the centrality of DIF, integrating developmental and adult data. Two of these explanations are essentialist accounts (causal and intentional essentialism). Two of them are normative accounts (conventional function and idea ownership). Though essentialist accounts have been very influential, we review evidence that shows their limitations. Normative accounts have been less predominant. We review evidence to support them, and discuss how they account for the data. In particular, we review evidence suggesting that the centrality of DIF can be explained as a case of idea ownership. This theory makes sense of a great deal of the existing data on the subject, reconciles contradictory results, links this line of work to other literatures, and offers an account of the observed developmental trend.
KW - Artifacts
KW - Design
KW - Essentialism
KW - Function
KW - Ownership
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84990220959&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.002
DO - 10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.002
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:84990220959
SN - 0273-2297
VL - 41
SP - 38
EP - 50
JO - Developmental Review
JF - Developmental Review
ER -