參考文獻

中文部分

王秀雯（2010）。應用學習環理論於國小五年級地球運動數位教材開發之研究。國立臺北教育大學教育傳播與科技研究所碩士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/9h5a4p
王靜如（2003）。科學本質的理論、教學知識與課程設計。論文發表於自然與生活科技學習領域課程研討會。台北：行政院國家科學委員會。
朱迺欣（譯）(2002)。尋找腦中幻影（原作者：V. S. Ramachandran & S. Blakeslee）。台北：遠流。（原著出版年：1998）
伍振鷟主編 (1996)。教育哲學。台北市：師大書苑。
沈潔華（2005）。以虛擬實境發展國小地球運動課程之設計與研究。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文，桃園縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/8rw4dt
宋曜廷、潘佩妤(2010)。混合研究在教育研究的應用。教育科學研
究，55(4)，97-130。
利健微（2012）。前導組體形式與工作記憶廣度對閱讀者在認知負荷與學習成效上之影響。國立嘉義大學數位學習設計與管理學系研究所碩士論文，嘉義市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/3k8ju9
李幸玟（2010）。前導組體型式與先備知識在多媒體學習成效與認知負荷上的影響──以國中地理科為例。國立嘉義大學教育科技研究所碩士論文，嘉義市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/9m2ssk
李正聖（2006）。不同型式的前導組體對國小六年級學童科學性文章閱讀理解之比較研究。國立臺中教育大學語文教育學系碩士班碩士論文，台中市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/nfdqf6
李昆妙（2003）。「時間概念」之解題活動類型：以一個國小一年級兒童為例。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，嘉義市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/s9653r
阮巨城（2017年1月14日）。Google Researcher講解：深度學習必備知識 [網路影片]。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li5sVEXTIJw。
邱美虹（2000）。概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊，8（1），1-34。
林天祐（1996）。認識研究倫理。教育資料與研究雙月刊，12，57-63。
林玉體 (1984)。西洋教育史。台北市：文景。
林旻璇（2009）。前導組體及單字註解在線上閱讀理解課程之整合應用。大葉大學應用外語研究所碩士論文，彰化縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/587mwe
林家民（2007）。POE教學策略對國小自然與生活科技領域中「地球運動」概念改變之研究。國立屏東教育大學應用化學暨生命科學系碩士論文，屏東縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/prb5y2
林傳傑（2004）。資訊融入教學與評量─以「地球運動」為例。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，屏東縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/taq728
吳建興（2007）。國民中學日、月、地系統電腦模擬教具的開發與教學成效探討。國立交通大學理學院碩士在職專班網路學習學程碩士論文，新竹市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/39y74g
洪瑞璘（譯）（2016）。留心你的大腦（原作者：G. Northoff）。臺北市：
臺大出版中心。（原著出版年：2014）
洪蘭（譯）（2012）。快思慢想（原作者：D. Kahneman）。臺北市：遠見天下文化。（原著出版年：2011）
南一書局（2003）。國民小學自然教學指引第九冊。台南市：南一書局。
苑舉正（1999）。邏輯實證論中的實在論發展。台灣哲學研究，2，229-262。
葉素玲（2017年6月2日）。探索17-5講座：知覺與覺知：意識的二重奏[網路影片]。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2
GmeY-yyrgw&list=LLHc4dafiUwP_HA8spGyokaQ&index=62&t=6903s
翁金鶯（2002）。國小學童地球運動之另有概念與空間概念關係之研究。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，屏東縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/wusje2
國立編譯館（1995）。國民小學第十一冊自然科教學指引（二版）。台北市：國立編譯館。
國家教育研究院（2013）。國民中學自然與生活科技第五冊。台北市：國家教育研究院教科書發展中心。
國家教育研究院（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程發展指引。2019年6月5日取自https://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/attach/93/pta_2558_5536793_14183.pdf
國家教育研究院（2019）。自然科學領域課程手冊。2019年6月5日取自https://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/img/67/130108399.pdf
張芳杰 (1991)。牛津高級英英英漢雙解辭典。台北：東華。
張春興（1989）。張氏心理學辭典。台北：東華。
張春興（1993）。現代心理學。台北：東華。
許健挺（1994）。學習者自建前導組體在科學性文章之學習的效益研究。淡江大學教育資料科學學系碩士論文，新北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/h3wbr5
郭建志（1995）。前導組體與先前知識對國小學童回憶效果之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，高雄市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/q3q3gf
陳玉玲（2000）。概念改變教學策略對地球運動概念之教學效果--以國小六年級學生為例。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/4sw3u7
陳小娟（2006）。國小六年級地球與太空概念二段式診斷測驗之發展與應用。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文，桃園縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/p6e49a
陳昆益（2005）。交互表徵教學策略對國小學童地球運動單元學習成效之研究。國立臺南大學教育學系課程與教學碩士班碩士論文，台南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/95r8t2
陳彥廷 (2008)。數概念教學活動實踐中幼兒的表現分析: 以 [十以內
合成與分解] 為例。科學教育研究與發展季刊，51, 60-90.
陳倩瑜 (2019年1月23日）。AI 嘉年華短講三：用人工智慧探索DNA中的調控密碼。[網路影片]。取自 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqFbqX7U8dI&list=LLHc4dafiUwP_HA8spGyokaQ&index=40&t=1422s。
陳瓊森、汪益（譯）（1995）。H. Gardner著。超越教化的心靈。台北：遠流。
曾建勳（2001）。前導組體與電腦視覺化模擬工具對國小學童機率學習之影響。國立臺南大學數學教育學系碩士論文，台南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/f42sg3
游寶達 (2017年1月14日）。Control Driven vs Data Driven 控制vs資料驅動[網路影片]。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AppM9lgPCeE。
黃光國（2003）。社會科學的理路（第二版）。台北：心理出版社。
黃政傑（1998）。課程設計（第三版）。台北：東華。
黃從仁 (2017年6月22日）。探索17-8講座：人工智慧與機器人能有意識嗎？[網路影片]。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MSZXZg1ESo。
黃宣範（2009）。棲於身的體現認知。載於蘇以文、畢永峨 主編，語言與認知，頁341-386。台北：台大出版中心。
黃春霏（2013）。體現認知策略對幼兒閱讀理解之影響。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文，嘉義縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/5k76fh
康軒文教集團（2012）。國民小學自然與生活科技第五冊。新北市：康軒。
楊志強（2015）。不同模型教學對國小學童方位概念學習及模型認知之影響。國立高雄師範大學科學教育暨環境教育研究所博士論文，高雄市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/x5e3hc
楊深坑（2002）。科學理論與教育學發展。臺北市：心理。
趙金祁、許榮富、黃芳裕 (1993)。科學哲學對組成科學知識之主張及其演變，科學教育月刊，000(161)，0004-0017。
廖士權（2003）。以建構主義網路化學習環境探究國小六年級學童「地球的運動」概念學習之研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/jrdrn7
廖雯玲（1999）。建構主義取向教學法對國小六年級學生在「地球運動」單元學習之影響。臺南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，台南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/g5hs8p
劉俊直（2006）。科學故事融入教學對國小高年級學童地球運動概念改變之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學物理學系碩士論文，高雄市。 取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/a3zpv9
劉淵源（2001）。國小學童的空間能力差異在STS教學策略中學習成效之比較。臺北市立師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文，臺北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/ek92ej
蔡承志（譯）(2009)。大腦比天空更遼闊（原作者：G.M.Edelman）。台北：商周。（原著出版年：2004）
蔡清田（1998）。由「教師即研究者」的英國教育改革理念論教師的課程決定。課程與教學季刊，1（4），57-72。
鄭榮輝（2006）。自然老師，你教的東西到底存不存在？－多元觀點下的科學與科學學習。科學教育月刊，289，16-29。
鄭惠心（2007）。視覺提示和試題預覽為前導組體對國小學童英語學習者聽力理解的影響。國立臺北教育大學兒童英語教育學系碩士班碩士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/jbr6qc
鄭麗玉（1993）。認知心理學-理論與應用。台北：五南。
戴鳳佳（2007）。前導組體模式對國小三年級數學低成就兒童數學加減文字題學習成效之研究。國立臺北教育大學特殊教育學系碩士班碩士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/xpe2y7
謝伯讓（2016）。大腦簡史。台北：貓頭鷹出版社。
翰林出版事業（2012）。國民小學自然與生活科技第五冊。台南市：翰林。
羅文鑫（2011）。發展地球科學日月地關係之動畫輔助評量。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/k3n383
蕭建嘉（2001）。以概念構圖的動態評量（CMDA）探討國小高年級學童的概念改變－以「地球的運動」單元為例。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/t7w3bk
龔卓軍（2006）。身體部屬。台北：心靈工坊。

外文部分

Abrahamson, D. (2009). Embodied design: Constructing means for constructing meaning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(1), 27-47.
Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners’and teachers’gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 247-286.
Amin, T. G., Smith, C. L., & Wiser, M. (2014). Student conceptions and conceptual change: Three overlapping phases of research. In N. Lederman & S. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (Vol. II, pp. 57-81). New York: Routledge.
Amorim, M. A., Isableu, B., & Jarraya, M. (2006). Embodied spatial transformations:" body analogy" for the mental rotation of objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(3), 327.
Amoruso, L., Gelormini, C., Aboitiz, F., González, M. A., Manes, F., Cardona, J. F., & Ibanez, A. (2013). N400 ERPs for actions: building meaning in context.Frontiers in human neuroscience, 7, 188-203.
Anderson, M. L. (2003). Embodied cognition: A field guide. Artificial
Intelligence, 149 (1):91-130.
Andler, D. (2006). Phenomenology in Artificial Intelligence and
Cognitive Science. In H.L. Dreyfus and M.A. Wrathall (Eds.),
A Companion to Phenomenology and Existentialism (pp. 377-
393). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publish.
Atkins, L. J. (2004). Analogies as Categorization Phenomena: Studies from Scientific Discourse. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.
Ausubel, D.P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and
retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 51, 267-272.
Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Ausubel, D.P. (2000a). The Nature of Meaning and Meaningful Learning. in D.P. Ausubel (Eds.), The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view (pp. 67-100). Dordrecht: Springer.
Ausubel, D.P. (2000b). Preview of Assimilation Theory of Meaningful Learning and Retention . in D.P. Ausubel (Eds.), The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view (pp. 1-18). Dordrecht: Springer.
Barsalou, L.W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and
Brain Sciences, 22, 577-660.
Barsalou, L. W., Simmons, W. K., Barbey, A. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(2), 84-91.
Barsalou, L.W. (2008). Grounding symbolic operations in the brain’s modal systems. In G.R. Semin & E.R. Smith (Eds.), Embodied grounding: Social, cognitive, affective, and neuroscientific approaches (pp. 9-42). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Barsalou, L.W. (2009). Simulation, situated conceptualization, and
prediction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
London: Biological Sciences, 364, 1281-1289.
Barnes, B. R., & Clawson, E. U. (1975). Do advance organizers facilitate learning?. Review of Educational Research, 45, 637-660.
Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Beauchamp, M. S., & Martin, A. (2007). Grounding object concepts in
perception and action: evidence from fMRI studies of tools. Cortex
43, 461-468.
Beer, R. D. (2003). The dynamics of active categorical perception in an
evolved model agent. Adaptive Behavior, 11, 209-243.
Beer, R. D. (2008). The dynamics of brain-body-environment systems. In P. Calvo and A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach, (pp. 99-120). New York: Elsevier.
Bednar, J.A. & Williams, C.K. (2016). Neural Maps: Their Function and Development. In M.A. Arbib and J.J. Bonaiuto (Eds.), From Neuron to Cognition via Computational Neuroscience (pp. 345-421). MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.
Beilock, S. L. (2008). Beyond the playing field: Sport psychology meets embodied cognition. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology,1(1), 19-30.
Bergen, B., & Feldman, J. (2008). Embodied concept learning. In P. Calvo and A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: an embodied approach (pp. 313-331). San Diego: Elsevier.
Blanke, O., Slater, M., and Serino, A. (2015). Behavioral, neural, and computational principles of bodily self-consciousness. Neuron, 88, 145–166.
Boyden, E. (2011, May 15). Ed Boyden: A light switch for neurons. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/ed_boyden.
Briscoe, R. (2009). Egocentric spatial representation in action and perception. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 79. 423-460.
Brooks, R. (1991a). Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence, 47:139-159.
Brooks, R. (1991b). New approaches to robotics. Science, 253, 1227 -1232.
Brooks, R. ( 1999 ). Cambrian Intelligence: The Early History of the New AI. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
Brozzoli, C., Cardinali, L., Pavani, F., & Farnè, A. (2010). Action-
specific remapping of peripersonalspace. Neuropsychologia, 48(3),
796-802.
Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1997). Education on the edge of
possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Carman, T. (1999). The Body in Husserl and Merleau-Ponty, Philosophical topics, 27(2), 205–226.
Cléry, J. & Hamed, S. B. (2018). Frontier of Self and Impact Prediction. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2018.01073
Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Two kinds and four sub-types of misconceived knowledge, ways to change it, and the learning outcomes. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), The international handbook of conceptual change (2nd ed., pp. 49-70). New York: Routledge.
Chwilla, D. J., Kolk, H. H., & Vissers, C. T. (2007). Immediate integration of novel meanings: N400 support for an embodied view of language comprehension. Brain research, 1183, 109-123.
Chwilla, D.J. (2012). How does the brain establish novel meanings in language? Abstract symbol theories versus embodied theories of meaning. In M. Faust (eds), Handbook of the neuropsychology of language (Vol.1, pp. 252-276). Hoboken: Blackwell Wiley.
Clark, A. (1999a). Where brain, body, and world collide. Cognitive Systems Research, 1(1), 5-17.
Clark, A. (1999b). An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 3 (9), 345–351.
Clark, A. (2013). Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 181-204.
Clark, A. (2015). Embodied prediction. In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds). Open MIND (pp. 255-276). Frankfurt am Main: MIND Group.
Clement, J. J. (2008). Creative model construction in scientists and students: The role of imagery, analogy, and mental simulation. Springer Science & Business Media.
Crick, F. H. (1995). Astonishing hypothesis: The scientific search for the soul. Simon and Schuster.
Crick, F. H. (1979). Thinking about the brain. Scientific American.241,
219-232.
Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2011). Modality switching costs emerge in concept creation as well as retrieval. Cognitive Science, 35(4), 763-778.
Connell, L., Lynott, D., & Dreyer, F. (2012). A functional role for modality-specific perceptual systems in conceptual representations. PLoS One, 7. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0033321
Conson, M., Mazzarella, E., Esposito, D., Grossi, D., Marino, N., Massagli, A., & Frolli, A. (2015). " Put Myself Into Your Place": Embodied Simulation and Perspective Taking in Autism Spectrum Disorders. Autism research,8(4), 454-466.
Cook, M. P. (2006). Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Science Education, 90(6), 1073-1091.
Cowart, M. (2011). Embodied Cognition. Internet Encyclopedia of
Philosophy. (Summer 2011 Edition). Retrieved from:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/embodcog/.
Debarba, H. G., Bovet, S., Salomon, R., Blanke, O., Herbelin, B., & Boulic, R. (2017). Characterizing first and third person viewpoints and their alternation for embodied interaction in virtual reality. PLOS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190109
de Castro Bellini-Leite, S. (2013). The embodied embedded character
of System 1 processing. Mens Sana Monogr. 11(1), 239-52.
DiSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and instruction, 10(2-3), 105-225.
Dielenberg, R,.A. (2013). The Speculative Neuroscience of the Future Human Brain. Humanities. 2(2), 209-252.
Di Paolo, E., Barandiaran, X. E., Beaton, M., & Buhrmann, T. (2014). Learning to perceive in the sensorimotor approach: Piaget’s theory of equilibration interpreted dynamically. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 551.
Dreyfus, H. L. (1972). What Computer Still Can't Do. New York:
MIT Press.
Dreyfus, H., & Dreyfus, S. (1986). Mind over Machine: The Power
of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer,
Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
Dreyfus, H. L. (1991) Being-in-the-world: A commentary on Heidegger’s Being and Time. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Dreyfus, H. L. (2002). Intelligence Without Representation– Merleau-
Ponty's critique of mental representation the relevance of
phenomenology to scientific explanation. Phenomenology and the
Cognitive Sciences, 1(4), 367-383.
Dulany, D.E. (2014). What Explains Consciousness? Or...What Consciousness Explains? Mens Sana Monographs, 12, 11-34.
Edelman, G. M. (1992). Bright air, brilliant fire. Basic, New York.
Edelman, G. M. (2004). Wider than the sky: The phenomenal gift of consciousness. Yale University Press.
Ehrenstein, W. H., Spillman, L., & Sarris, V. (2003). Gestalt issues in modern neuroscience. Axiomathes, 13(3-4), 433-458.
Elby, A. & Hammer, D. (2010). Epistemological resources and framing. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal Epistemology in the Classroom: Theory, Research, and Implications for Practice (pp. 409-434). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Emmeche, C. (2007). On the biosemiotics of embodiment and our human cyborg nature. In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev, R. Frank, R. Dirven, (Eds.), Body, Language and Mind (Vol. 1, pp. 379-410). Berlin: Mouton.
Erle, T. M., & Topolinski, S. (2015). Spatial and empathic perspective-
taking correlate on a dispositional level. Social Cognition, 33(3),
187–210.
Erle, T. M., and Topolinski, S. (2017). The grounded nature of psychological perspective-taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 683–695.
Erle, T.M. (2019). Level-2 visuo-spatial perspective-taking and interoception – More evidence for the embodiment of perspective-taking. Public Library of Science ONE 14(6). doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0219005
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2003). In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognition Sciences, 7(10), 454-459.
Evans, J. St. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223-241.
Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach (Vol. 5). Springer Science & Business Media.
Flusberg S. J., Thibodeau P. H., Sternberg D. A., & Glick J. J. (2012). A connectionist approach to embodied conceptual metaphor. In AM. Borghi, D. Pecher (Eds.), Embodied and grounded cognition (pp. 142-152). Frontiers Media SA.
Freeman, W. J. (1991). The physiology of perception. Scientific American, 264(2), 78-85.
Freeman WJ (1999). Consciousness, intentionality, and causality.
Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6, 143-172.
Freeman, W. J. (2003a). The wave packet: an action potential for the 21st century. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 2(1), 3-30.
Freeman, W. J. (2003b). A neurobiological theory of meaning in perception. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 13, 2513-2535.
Freeman, W. J. (2004). How and why brains create meaning from sensory information. International journal of bifurcation and chaos, 14(2), 515-530.
Freeman, W. J. (2007). Intentionality. Scholarpedia, 2(2), 1337.
Fridland, E. (2011). The case for proprioception. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 10(4), 521-540.
Friston, K. (2011). Embodied inference: or “I think therefore I am, if I am what I think”. In W. Tschacher & C. Bergomi (Eds.), The Implications of Embodiment: Cognition and Communication (pp. 89-125). UK: Imprint Academic.
Fuchs, H. U. (2007). From image schemas to dynamical models in fluids, electricity, heat and motion. An essay on physics education research. Retrieved October 26, 2012, from https://home.zhaw.ch
/~fusa/COURSES/JO/Files_V/PER_Essay.pdf
Fuchs H. U. (2011). Force Dynamic Gestalt, Metaphor, and Scientific Thought. In Atti del Convegno “Innovazione nella didattica delle scienze nella scuola primaria: al crocevia fra discipline scientifiche e umanistiche”, Ed. Artestampa, Modena, Italy. (Conference held in November 2010)
Gallagher, S. (2000). Philosophical conceptions of the self: Implications for cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 14-21.
Gallagher, S., & Varela, F. J. (2003). Redrawing the map and resetting the time: Phenomenology and the cognitive sciences. Canadian journal of philosophy, 33(1), 93-132.
Gallagher, S. (2005). How the Body Shapes the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gallagher, S. (2018). New mechanisms and the enactivist concept of constitution. In M.P. Guta (Ed.), The Metaphysics of Consciousness (pp. 207-220). London: Routledge.
Gallese, V., & Goldman, A. (1998). Mirror neurons and the simulation theory of mind-reading. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 493-501.
Gallese, V., & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive neuropsychology, 22(3-4), 455-479.
Gallese, V. (2005). Mirror Neurons and the Neural Exploitation: Hypothesis From Embodied Simulation to Social Cognition. In J.A. Pineda (Eds.), Mirror neuron systems: The role of mirroring processes in social cognition (pp. 163-190). New York: Humana.
Gallese, V. (2009). Mirror neurons, embody simulation and the neural basis of social identifi- cation. Psychoanalitic Dialogues, 19, 519-536.
Gangopadhyay, N., Madary, M., & Spicer, F. (2010). Perception, Action and Consciousness. Sensorimotor Dynamics and the Two Visual Systems. In N.Gangopadhyay, M.Madary, & F.Spicer (Eds.),
Perception, action and consciousness (pp. 1–18). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Gibson, J.J. (1966). The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gibson, J.J. (1978). The Ecological Approach to The Visual Perception of Picture. Leonardo,1(l1), 227-235.
Gibson, J.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Georgiou, A. K. (2007). An embodied cognition view of imagery-based reasoning in science: Lessons from thought experiments. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, (20), 215-248.
Glenberg, A. M., & Robertson, D. A. (1999). Indexical understanding
of instructions. Discourse Process. 28, 1-26. Glenberg, A. M., & Robertson, D. A. (2000). Symbol grounding and
meaning: A comparison of high-dimensional and embodied
theories of meaning. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 379-401.
Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in
action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 558-565.
Glenberg, A. M. & Gutierrez, T. & Levin, J. R. & Japuntich, S. &
Kaschak, M. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance
young readers’ reading comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 96,424–436.
Glenberg, A. M. & Levin J. R. & Marley S. C. (2007). Improving
Native American children’s listening comprehension through
concrete representations. Contemporary Educational Psychology
32 .537–550.
Glenberg, A. M. (2008). Embodiment for Education. In P. Calvo and A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (pp. 355-372). New York: Elsevier.
Gomila, A. & Calvo, P. (2008). Directions for an embodied cognitive science: towards an integrated approach. In P. Calvo & A. Gomila (Eds.). Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (pp. 1-25). New York: Elsevier.
Gonzalez-Franco, M. G. F., and Peck, T. C. (2018). Avatar embodiment. Towards a standardized questionnaire. Front.in Robotics and AI, 5, 74. doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00074
Goodale, M.A. & Milner, A.D. (1992). Separate visual pathways for
perception and action. Trends inNeurosciences, 15, 20-25.
Goodale, Melvyn & Milner, David. (2006). One brain - Two visual systems. Psychologist, 19 (11), 660-663.
Gunstone, R. (2015). Meaningful Learning. In Gunstone R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Science Education. Springer, Dordrecht. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0_121
Hagoort, P., Hald, L., Bastiaansen, M., & Petersson, K. M. (2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304(5669), 438-441.
Hald, L. A., Marshall, J. A., Janssen, D. P., & Garnham, A. (2011). Switching Modalities in A Sentence Verification Task: ERP Evidence for Embodied Language Processing. Frontiers in psychology, 2, 45. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00045
Hamilton, A. F. (2008). Emulation and mimicry for social interaction: A theoretical approach to imitation in autism. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 101-115.
Hammer, D. (1996). Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97-127.
Hammond, M. (2010). What is an affordance and can it help us
understand the use of ICT in education? Education and
Information Technologies, 15 (3), 205-217.
Harnad, S. (2005). Cognition is categorization, In Cohen H. & Lefebvre C. (Eds.), Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science (pp. 20-45). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Science.
Haselager, P., van Dijk, J., and van Rooj, I. (2008). A lazy brain? Embodied embedded cognition and cognitive neuroscience. In Calvo P. & Gomila A. (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Science: An Embodied Approach (pp. 273-287). New York: Elsevier.
Heras-Escribano, M., & De Pinedo-García, M. (2018). Affordances and landscapes: Overcoming the nature-culture dichotomy through niche construction theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2294. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02294.
Hestenes D. (2006). Notes for a Modeling Theory of Science, Cognition and Instruction. Proceedings of the 2006 GIREP Conference on Modeling in Physics and Physics Education. University of Amsterdam.
Hirose, N. (2002). An ecological approach to embodiment and
cognition. Cognitive Systems Research, 3(3), 289-299.
Holst, E., & Mittelstaedt, H. (1971). Das reafferenzprinzip. Naturwissenschaften, In P. Dodwell, (Eds.). Perceptual Processing: stimulus equivalence and pattern recognition (pp. 41-72). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Ionescu, T., & Vasc, D. (2014). Embodied cognition: challenges for psychology and education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 128, 275-280.
Ito, Y., & Hatta, T. (2004). Spatial structure of quantitative representation of numbers: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Memory & Cognition, 32(4), 662-673.
Jeppsson, F., Haglund, J., Amin, T. G., & Strömdahl, H. (2013). Exploring the use of conceptual metaphors in solving problems on entropy. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(1), 70-120.
Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of
Meaning, Imagination and Reason. University of Chicago Press.
Johnson, M. (1989). Embodied knowledge. Curriculum inquiry, 19(4), 361-377.
Johnson, M. (2007). The Meaning of the Body: Aesthetics of Human
Understanding. University of Chicago Press.
Jonassen, D. H., Strobel, J. and Gottdenker, J. (2005). Model building for conceptual change. Interactive Learning Environments, 13(1–2), 15–37.
Johnson, M. & Rohrer, T. (2007). We Are Live Creatures Embodiment,
American Pragmatism, and the Cognitive Organism. In T. Ziemke,
J. Zlatev, R. Frank, R. Dirven, (Eds.), Body, Language and Mind (
Vol. 1, pp. 7-54). Berlin: Mouton.
Jones, N. (2014). The learning machines. Nature, 505, 146–148.
Kang, J., Lindgren, R., & Planey, J. (2018). Exploring Emergent Features of Student Interaction within an Embodied Science Learning Simulation. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2(3), 39.
Kessler, K., & Thomson, L. A. (2010). The embodied nature of spatial perspective taking: embodied transformation versus sensorimotor interference.Cognition, 114(1), 72-88.
Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex, 48(7), 805-825.
Kilteni, K., Groten, R., & Slater, M. (2012). The sense of embodiment in virtual reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 21, 373-387.
Kiverstein, J. (2010). Sensorimotor knowledge and the contents of experience. In N.Gangopadhyay, M. Madary & F.Spicer (Eds.),
Perception, action and consciousness (pp. 1-18) . New York: Oxford University Press.
Kiverstein, J. (2012). The Meaning of Embodiment. Topics in cognitive science, 4(4), 740-758.
Kolb, B. & Gibb, R. (2011). Brain plasticity and behaviour in the developing brain. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatr, 20, 265–276.
Kolb, B., Mychasiuk, R., Muhammad, A., Li, Y., Frost, D. O., & Gibb, R. (2012). Experience and the developing prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 16, 109.
Kontra, C., Goldin‐Meadow, S., & Beilock, S. L. (2012). Embodied
learning across the life span. Topics in cognitive science, 4(4),
731-739.
Kroliczak, G., Heard, P., Goodale, M.A. & Gregory, R.L. (2006).
Dissociation of perception and action unmasked by the hollow-face
illusion. Brain Research, 1080, 9–16.
Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203-205.
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, 621-647.
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lee, J., Bang J., & Suh, H. (2018). Identifying Affordance Features in Virtual Reality: How Do Virtual Reality Games Reinforce User Experience?. In D. Schmorrow, & C. Fidopiastis (eds.), Augmented Cognition: Intelligent Technologies. AC 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 10915, 383-394. Springer, Cham.
Legrand, D. (2010). Myself with no body? Body, bodily-consciousness and self-consciousness. In S. Gallagher and D. Schmicking (eds.), Handbook of Phenomenology and Cognitive Science (pp. 180-200). Springer Netherlands.
Li, Q., Clark, B., & Winchester, I. (2010). Instructional design and technology grounded in enactivism: A paradigm shift?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 403-419.
Libet, B. (2004). Mind Time: The Temporal Factor in Consciousness. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.
Lindblom, J. (2007). Minding the body: Interacting socially through embodied action. Linköping Studies in Science and Technology, dissertation no.1112. Linköping: Linköping University Publication.
Lynott, D., & Connell, L. (2010). Embodied Conceptual Combination.
Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 212, 79-92.
Macaluso, E., & Maravita, A. (2010). The representation of space near the body through touch and vision. Neuropsychologia, 48(3), 782-795.
Magosso, E., Ursino, M., Di Pellegrino, G., Làdavas, E., & Serino, A. (2010). Neural bases of peri-hand space plasticity through tool-use: Insights from a combined computational–experimental approach. Neuropsychologia, 48(3), 812-830.
Mahon, B. Z. & Caramazza, A. (2009). Concepts and categories: A cognitive neuropsychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 27-51.
Melmoth, D. R., Tibber, M. S., & Morgan, M. J. (2010). Hermann Lotze’s Theory of ‘Local Sign’: evidence from pointing responses in an illusory figure. In N. Gangopadhyay, M. Madary, & F.Spicer
(Eds.), Perception, action and consciousness (pp. 257–273). New York: Oxford University Press.
Martin, A. (2007). The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 25-45.
Martinez, M. E. (2010). Learning and cognition: The design of the
mind. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and instruction (2nd ed). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of Perception, (C. Smith,
Trans.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1962. (Original
work published 1945).
Metzinger, T. & Windt, J. M. (2015). What Does it Mean to Have an Open MIND? In T. Metzinger & J. M. Windt (Eds). Open MIND (pp. 4-31). Frankfurt am Main: MIND Group.
Mulder, H., Oudgenoeg-Paz, O., Hellendoorn, A., & Jongmans, M. J. (2016). How children learn to discover their environment: An embodied dynamic systems perspective on the development of spatial cognition. In A. Postma & I. J. M. Van der Ham (Eds.),
Neuropsychology of space: Spatial functions of the human brain (pp. 309-360). London, UK: Academic Press.
Nadelson, L.S., Heddy, B.C., Jones, S., Taasoobshirazi, G., & Johnson, M. (2018). Conceptual Change in Science Teaching and Learning: Introducing the Dynamic Model of Conceptual Change. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 7(2), 151-195. doi:10.17583/ijep.2018.3349
Nemirovsky, R., & Ferrara, F. (2009). Mathematical imagination and embodied cognition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 159-174.
Nemirovsky, R., Rasmussen, C., Sweeney, G., & Wawro, M. (2012). When the classroom floor becomes the complex plane: Addition and multiplication as ways of bodily navigation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 287-323.
Niedenthal, P.M., Barsalou, L.W., Winkielman, P., Krauth-Gruber, S., & Ric, F. (2005).Embodiment in attitudes, social perception, and emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 184-211.
Norman, J. (2002). Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches.Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 25, 73–144.
Novak, J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or appropriate propositional hierarchies (liphs) leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education, 86(4), 548-571.
Núñez, R. E. (1999). Could the Future Taste Purple? Reclaiming Mind, Body and Cognition. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6 (11–12), 41–60.
Núñez, R. E. (2008). Mathematics, the Ultimate Challenge to Embodiment: Truth and the Grounding of Axiomatic Systems. In P. Calvo and A. Gomila (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive science: An embodied approach (pp. 333-353). New York: Elsevier.
Núñez, R. E. (2012). On the Science of Embodied Cognition in the 2010s: Research Questions, Appropriate Reductionism, and Testable Explanations, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 1-13.
Olitsky, S. & Milne, C. (2012). Understanding engagement in science education: The psychological and the social. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.) Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 19-33). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Publishing.
Parsons, L. M. (1987) Imagined spatial transformations of one’s body. Journal of Experimental Psychology, General 116, 172–91.
Pfeifer, R., & Bongard, J. (2006). How the body shapes the way we think: a new view of intelligence. MIT press.
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (2000). Understanding Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary Curriculum Discourses . New York: Peter Lang.
Pineda, J. A., Moore, R. A., Elfenbeinand, H., & Cox, R. (2010). Hierarchically organized mirroring processes in social cognition: The functional neuroanatomy of empathy. In J.A. Pineda (Eds.), Mirror neuron systems: The role of mirroring processes in social cognition (pp. 135-160). New York: Humana Press.
Poirier, P., Hardy-Vallee, Benoit., & DePasquale, J. F. (2005). Embodied categorization. In H. Cohen & C. Lefebvre (Eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (pp. 739-765). Oxford: Oxford.
Pulvermüller, F. (2013). How neurons make meaning: brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics. Trends in cognitive sciences, 17(9), 458-470.
Prinz, J. J. (2005). The return of concept empiricism. In H. Cohen & C. Lefebvre (Eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (pp. 679–699). Oxford: Oxford.
Putnam, H. (1975). The Meaning of Meaning, in Keith Gunderson (eds.), Language, Mind, and Knowledge: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science (Vol.7, pp. 131-193). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Radford, L., Cerulli, M., Demers, S., & Guzmán, J. (2004). The sensual and the conceptual: Artefactmediated kinesthetic actions and semiotic activity. In M. J. Høines, & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28 Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol.4, pp.73–80). Norway: Bergen University College.
Radford, L. (2009). Why do gestures matter? Sensuous cognition and the palpability of mathematical meanings. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 111-126.
Radford, L. (2013). Sensuous cognition. In D. Martinovic, V. Freiman, & Z. Karadag (Eds.), Visual mathematics and cyberlearning (pp. 141-162). New York: Springer.
Rakic, P. (2009). Evolution of the neocortex: Perspective from developmental biology. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 10(10), 724–735.
Reiner, M. (2006). The context of thought experiments in physics learning. Interchange, 37(1-2), 97-113.
Robbins, P., & Aydede, M. (2009). A short primer on situated cognition. In P. Robbins & M. Aydede (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 3-10). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rohrer, T. (2005). Image schemata in the brain. In B. Hampe and J. Grady (Eds.), From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 165-196). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rohrer, T. (2007). The body in space: Dimensions of embodiment. In
T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev and R.M. Frank (eds.). Body, Language and
Mind (Vol. 1, pp. 339-378). Berlin: Mouton.
Sahin, E., & Erdogan, S. T. (2009). Towards linking affordances with mirror/canonical neurons. In 24th International Symposium on Computer and Information Sciences, 2009. ISCIS 2009. IEEE, 2009, 397-404.
Sanders, J. T. (1993). Merleau-Ponty, Gibson, and the materiality of meaning.Man and World, 26(3), 287-302.
Schiro, M. S. (2008). Curriculum Theory. Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Schwarz, W., & Keus, I. M. (2004). Moving the eyes along the mental number line: Comparing SNARC effects with saccadic and manual responses.Perception & Psychophysics, 66(4), 651-664.
Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality: An essay in the philosophy of mind .
Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. (1980). Minds, Brains and Programs, Behavioral and Brain
Sciences 3 (3), 417-457.
Shapiro, L. (2011). Embodied Cognition. New York: Routledge.
Sonesson, G. (2007). From the meaning of embodiment to the embodiment of meaning: A study in phenomenological semiotics. In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev, R. Frank, R. Dirven, (Eds.), Body, Language and Mind (Vol. 1, pp. 85-128). Berlin: Mouton.
Taler, V., Kousaie, S., and Zunini, R. L. (2013). ERP measures of semantic richness: the case of multiple senses. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:5. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00005
Tamè, L., Azañón, E., & Longo, M. (2019). A conceptual model of tactile processing across body features of size, shape, side, and spatial location. Frontiers in Psychology. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00291.
Thompson, E. & Cosmelli, D. (2011). Brain in a vat or body in a world? Brainbound versus enactive views of experience. Philosophical Topics, 39, 163-180.
Tsakiris, M. & Haggard, P. (2005). The rubber hand illusion revisited: visuotactile integration and self-attribution. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31: 80-91.
Tversky, B. (2001). Structures of mental spaces. In Proceedings 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium Atlanta , 121-125.
Tversky, B. (2005). Some ways images express and promote thought. In P. Grialou, G. Longo, and M. Okada (Eds.), Image and reasoning, 15-29. Tokyo: Keio University Press.
Tversky, B. (2008). Spatial cognition: Situated and embodied. In P. Robbins and M. Aydede (Eds). Cambridge handbook of situated cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tversky, B. & Hard, B. M. (2009). Embodied and disembodied cognition: Spatial perspective taking. Cognition, 110, 124-129.
Tversky, B. (2011). Visualizations of thought. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3, 499-535.
Vallée-Tourangeau, G., & Vallée-Tourangeau, F. (2017). Cognition beyond the classical information processing model: Cognitive interactivity and the systemic thinking model (SysTM). In S. Cowley & F. Vallée-Tourangeau (Eds.), Cognition beyond the brain: Interactivity and human thinking (2nd ed., pp. 133–154). London: Springer.
Van der Stoep, N., Serino, A., Di Luca, M., & Spence, C. (2016). Depth: the forgotten dimension in multisensory research. Multisensory Research. 29, 493-524.
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind:
Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Vossel, S., Geng, J. J., & Friston, K. J. (2014). Attention, predictions and expectations, and their violation: attentional control in the human brain. Frontiers in Human Neurosciences, 8, 490-490.
Vosniadou, S. (2007a). Conceptual change and education. Human Development, 50, 47–54.
Vosniadou, S. (2007b). The Cognitive–Situative Divide and the Problemof Conceptual Change. Educational Psychologist, 42(1), 55–66.
Vosniadou, S. (2012). Reframing the classical approach to conceptual change: Preconceptions, misconceptions and synthetic models. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 119-130). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Publishing.
Williams, R. F. (2012). Image schemas in clock-reading: Latent errors and emerging expertise. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 216-246.
Williams, D. (2017). Predictive processing and the representation wars. Minds and Machines, 28, 141-172.
Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition, Psychonomic
Bulletin and Review, 9, 625-636.
Wilson, R. A. (2010). Extended vision. In N.Gangopadhyay, M.Madary, & F.Spicer (Eds.), Perception, action and consciousness (pp. 277-290). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, A. D., and Golonka, S. (2013). Embodied cognition is not what
you think it is. Frontiers in psychology, 4:58. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00058
Wittmann, M. C. (2010). Using conceptual blending to describe emergent meaning in wave propagation. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS '10, Chicago, IL. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.0216
Wittmann, M. C., & Chase, E. (2012). Evidence of embodied cognition about wave propagation. In 2011 PHYSICS EDUCATION RESEARCH CONFERENCE, 1413, 383-386. AIP Publishing.
Ziemke, T. (2002). Situated and Embodied Cognition. Special issue of
the. Journal of Cognitive Systems Research, 3(3).271-274.
Ziemke, T. & Frank, R. M. (2007). Introduction: The body eclectic.
In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev and R. M. Frank (eds.). Body, Language
and Mind (Vol. 1, PP. 1-13). Berlin: Mouton.