OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science
2025 Jan-Feb;16 (1): e70000.

Giving Generic Language Another Thought.

Eleonore Neufeld, Anne Bosse, Guillermo Del Pinal, Rachel Sterken
Author Information
  1. Eleonore Neufeld: Department of Philosophy, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA. ORCID
  2. Anne Bosse: Department of Philosophy, University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong. ORCID
  3. Guillermo Del Pinal: Department of Philosophy, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, Massachusetts, USA. ORCID
  4. Rachel Sterken: Department of Philosophy, University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong. ORCID
PMID: 39914884 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.70000

Abstract

According to an influential research program in cognitive science, philosophy, and linguistics, there is a deep, special connection between generics and pernicious aspects of social cognition, such as stereotyping. Specifically, generics are thought to exacerbate our propensity to essentialize, lead us to overgeneralize based on scarce evidence and to other epistemically dubious patterns of inference. Recently, however, several studies have put empirical and theoretical pressure on some of the main tenets of this research program. The goal of this paper is to bring these results together in a comprehensive narrative and systematically evaluate their impact on the hypothesis that generics have a uniquely problematic effect on our social and cognitive capacities.

Keywords

generics generics���as���defaults hypothesis psychological essentialism social cognition stereotypes

References

  1. Allaway, E., N. Taneja, S.���J. Leslie, and M. Sap. 2022. ���Towards Countering Essentialism Through Social Bias Reasoning. NLP4PosImp Workshop, EMNLP.��� https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.16173.
  2. Almotahari, M. 2024. ���Generic Cognition: A Neglected Source of Context Sensitivity.��� Mind & Language 39: 472���491. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12491.
  3. Anderson, L., S. Haslanger, and R. Langton. 2012. ���Language and Race.��� In Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Language, 753���767. London: Routledge.
  4. Antony, L. 2022. ���The Importance of Being Partial: The Constructive Role of Bias in Human Life.��� Amherst Lecture in Philosophy 15: 1���19.
  5. Appiah, K. A. 2018. The Lies That Bind: Rethinking Identity. New York, NY: Liveright Publishing Company.
  6. Bailey, A. H., and J. Knobe. 2023. ���Biological Essentialism Correlates With (But Doesn't Cause?) Intergroup Bias.��� Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 50: 1080���1097.
  7. Banaji, M. R., S. T. Fiske, and D. S. Massey. 2021. ���Systemic Racism: Individuals and Interactions, Institutions and Society.��� Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 6: 1���21.
  8. Barsalou, L. W. 1983. ���Ad Hoc Categories.��� Memory & Cognition 11: 211���227.
  9. Begby, E. 2021. Prejudice: A Study in Non���Ideal Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Beghelli, F., and T. Stowell. 1997. Distributivity and Negation: The Syntax of Each and Every Ways of Scope Taking, 71���107. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
  11. Berio, L., and K. Musholt. 2023. ���How Language Shapes Our Minds: On the Relationship Between Generics, Stereotypes and Social Norms.��� Mind & Language 38, no. 4: 944���961. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12449.
  12. Bian, L., and A. Cimpian. 2017. ���Are Stereotypes Accurate? A Perspective From the Cognitive Science of Concepts.��� Behavioral and Brain Sciences 40: e3. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X15002307.
  13. Bosse, A. 2021. ���Generics: Some (Non) Specifics.��� Synthese 5���6: 14383���14401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229���021���03426���8.
  14. Bosse, A. 2022. ���Generics and Stereotyping.��� Inquiry 1���17: 3876���3892. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2022.2074879.
  15. Brandone, A. C., S. A. Gelman, and J. Hedglen. 2015. ���Children's Developing Intuitions About the Truth Conditions and Implications of Novel Generics Versus Quantified Statements.��� Cognitive Science 39, no. 4: 711���738. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12176.
  16. Briggs, R. A. 2023. ���Normative Theories of Rational Choice: Expected Utility.��� In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2023 Edition), edited by E. N. Zalta and U. Nodelman. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/rationality���normative���utility/.
  17. Cappelen, H., and J. Dever. 2019. Bad Language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  18. Carlson, G. 1977. Reference to Kinds in English. Amherst, MA: Electronic Doctoral Dissertations for UMass Amherst/University of Massachusetts.
  19. Carston, R. 2002. ���Linguistic Meaning, Communicated Meaning and Cognitive Pragmatics.��� Mind & Language 17, no. 1���2: 127���148.
  20. Castroviejo, E., J. V. Hern��ndez���Conde, D. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, M. Ponciano, and A. Vicente. 2023. ���Are Generics Defaults? A Study on the Interpretation of Generics and Universals in 3 Age���Groups of Spanish���Speaking Individuals.��� Language Learning and Development 19, no. 3: 275���302. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2022.2071715.
  21. Cella, F., K. A. Marchak, C. Bianchi, and S. A. Gelman. 2022. ���Generic Language for Social and Animal Kinds: An Examination of the Asymmetry Between Acceptance and Inferences.��� Cognitive Science 46, no. 12: e13209. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13209.
  22. Chierchia, G. 1998. ���Reference to Kinds Across Languages.��� Natural Language Semantics 6, no. 4: 339���405.
  23. Cimpian, A. 2015. ���The Inherence Heuristic: Generating Everyday Explanations.��� In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, edited by R. Scott and S. Kosslyn, 1���15. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
  24. Cimpian, A., A. C. Brandone, and S. A. Gelman. 2010. ���Generic Statements Require Little Evidence for Acceptance but Have Powerful Implications.��� Cognitive Science 34, no. 8: 1452���1482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551���6709.2010.01126.x.
  25. Cimpian, A., and L. C. Erickson. 2012. ���The Effect of Generic Statements on Children's Causal Attributions: Questions of Mechanism.��� Developmental Psychology 48, no. 1: 159���170.
  26. Cimpian, A., S. A. Gelman, and A. C. Brandone. 2010. ���Theory���Based Considerations Influence the Interpretation of Generic Sentences.��� Language & Cognitive Processes 25, no. 2: 261���276. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960903025227.
  27. Cimpian, A., and E. M. Markman. 2011. ���The Generic/Nongeneric Distinction Influences How Children Interpret New Information About Social Others.��� Child Development 82, no. 2: 471���492.
  28. Cimpian, A., and E. Salomon. 2014. ���The Inherence Heuristic: An Intuitive Means of Making Sense of the World, and a Potential Precursor to Psychological Essentialism.��� Behavioral and Brain Sciences 37, no. 5: 461���527.
  29. Claridge, C. 2010. Hyperbole in English: A Corpus���Based Study of Exaggeration. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Dahl, ��. 1985. Tense and Aspect Systems. Oxford: Blackwell.
  31. Dayal, V. 2004. ���Number Marking and (In)definiteness in Kind Terms.��� Linguistics and Philosophy 27, no. 4: 393���450.
  32. Degen, J. 2023. ���The Rational Speech Act Framework.��� Annual Review of Linguistics 9: 519���540.
  33. Demoulin, S., J.���P. Leyens, and V. Yzerbyt. 2006. ���Lay Theories of Essentialism.��� Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 9, no. 1: 25���42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430206059856.
  34. Gelman, S. A. 2003. The Essential Child: Origins of Essentialism in Everyday Thought. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  35. Gelman, S. A. 2004. ���Psychological Essentialism in Children.��� Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8, no. 9: 404���409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.07.001.
  36. Gelman, S. A. 2021. ���Generics in Society.��� Language in Society 50, no. 4: 517���532.
  37. Gelman, S. A., S.���J. Leslie, R. Gelman, and A. Leslie. 2019. ���Do Children Recall Numbers as Generic? A Strong Test of the Generics���As���Default Hypothesis.��� Language Learning and Development 15, no. 3: 217���231. https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2019.1571418.
  38. Gelman, S. A., S. J. Leslie, A. M. Was, and C. M. Koch. 2015. ���Children's Interpretations of General Quantifiers, Specific Quantifiers and Generics.��� Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 30, no. 4: 448���461. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2014.931591.
  39. Gelman, S. A., and L. Raman. 2003. ���Preschool Children Use Linguistic Form Class and Pragmatic Cues to Interpret Generics.��� Child Development 74, no. 1: 308���325. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467���8624.00537.
  40. Gelman, S. A., and S. O. Roberts. 2017. ���How Language Shapes the Cultural Inheritance of Categories.��� Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, no. 30: 7900���7907. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1621073114.
  41. Gelman, S. A., I. S��nchez Tapia, and S.���J. Leslie. 2016. ���Memory for Generic and Quantified Sentences in Spanish���Speaking Children and Adults.��� Journal of Child Language 43, no. 6: 1231���1244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000483.
  42. Gelman, S. A., E. A. Ware, and F. Kleinberg. 2010. ���Effects of Generic Language on Category Content and Structure.��� Cognitive Psychology 61, no. 3: 273���301.
  43. Goodman, N. D., and M. C. Frank. 2016. ���Pragmatic Language Interpretation as Probabilistic Inference.��� Trends in Cognitive Science 20, no. 11: 818���829.
  44. Graham, S. A., S. A. Gelman, and J. Clarke. 2016. ���Generics License 30���Month���Olds' Inferences About the Atypical Properties of Novel Kinds.��� Developmental Psychology 52, no. 9: 1353���1362. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000183.
  45. Hammond, M. D., and A. Cimpian. 2017. ���Investigating the Cognitive Structure of Stereotypes: Generic Beliefs About Groups Predict Social Judgments Better Than Statistical Beliefs.��� Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 146, no. 5: 607���614. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000297.
  46. Haslam, N., E. Holland, and M. Karasawa. 2014. ���Essentialism and Entitativity Across Cultures.��� In Culture and Group Processes, 17���37. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199985463.003.0002.
  47. Haslam, N., and S. R. Levy. 2006. ���Essentialist Beliefs About Homosexuality: Structure and Implications for Prejudice.��� Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 32, no. 4: 471���485. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205276516.
  48. Haslam, N., L. Rothschild, and D. Ernst. 2000. ���Essentialist Beliefs About Social Categories.��� British Journal of Social Psychology 39, no. Pt 1: 113���127. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164363.
  49. Haslam, N., L. Rothschild, D. Ernst, V. Yzerbyt, C. M. Judd, and O. Corneille. 2004. ���Essentialism and Entitativity: Structures of Beliefs About the Ontology of Social Categories.��� Psychology of Group Perception: Perceived Variability, Entitativity, and Essentialism: 61���78. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203644973.
  50. Haslanger, S. 2000. ���Gender and Race: (What) are They? (What) do We Want Them to Be?��� No��s 34, no. 1: 31���55. https://doi.org/10.1111/0029���4624.00201.
  51. Haslanger, S. 2011. ���Ideology, Generics, and Common Ground.��� In Feminist Metaphysics: Explorations in the Ontology of Sex, Gender and the Self, 179���207. Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978���90���481���3783���1_11.
  52. Haslanger, S. 2015. ���Distinguished Lecture: Social Structure, Narrative and Explanation.��� Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45, no. 1: 1���15.
  53. Haward, P., L. Wagner, S. Carey, and S. Prasada. 2018. ���The Development of Principled Connections and Kind Representations.��� Cognition 176: 255���268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.001.
  54. Hesni, S. 2024. ���Generics and Social Justice.��� Philosophical Studies 181: 109���132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098���023���02064���9.
  55. Hoicka, E., J. Saul, E. Prouten, L. Whitehead, and R. Sterken. 2021. ���Language Signaling High Proportions and Generics Lead to Generalizing, but Not Essentializing, for Novel Social Kinds.��� Cognitive Science 45, no. 11: e13051. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13051.
  56. Hollander, M. A., S. A. Gelman, and J. Star. 2002. ���Children's Interpretation of Generic Noun Phrases.��� Developmental Psychology 38, no. 6: 883���894. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012���1649.38.6.883.
  57. Johnston, M., and S.���J. Leslie. 2012. ���Concepts, Analysis, Generics and the Canberra Plan.��� Philosophical Perspectives 26, no. 1: 113���171. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpe.12015.
  58. Khemlani, S., S. J. Leslie, and S. Glucksberg. 2009. ���Generics, Prevalence, and Default Inferences.��� Proceedings of the 31st Annual Cognitive Science Society: 443���448.
  59. Khemlani, S., S. J. Leslie, and S. Glucksberg. 2012. ���Inferences About Members of Kinds: The Generics Hypothesis.��� Language and Cognitive Processes 27, no. 6: 887���900. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.601900.
  60. Kirkpatrick, J. R. 2024. ���The Acquisition of Generics.��� Mind & Language 1���26: 492���517. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12499.
  61. Krifka, M., F. J. Pelletier, G. Carlson, A. Ter Meulen, G. Chierchia, and G. Link. 1995. ���Genericity: An Introduction.��� In The Generic Book, edited by G. N. Carlson and F. J. Pelletier, 1���124. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  62. Kunda, Z. 1990. ���The Case for Motivated Reasoning.��� Psychological Bulletin 108, no. 3: 480���498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033���2909.108.3.480.
  63. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D. 2019. ���Genericity.��� In The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics, edited by C. Cummins and N. Katsos. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.12.
  64. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., N. Katsos, and L. Stockall. 2015. ���Genericity Is Easy? Formal and Experimental Perspectives.��� Ratio 28, no. 4: 470���494.
  65. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., N. Katsos, and L. Stockall. 2019a. ���Experimental Evidence on Genericity and Universal Quantification in Greek and English.��� In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Greek Linguistics, edited by M. Chondrogianni, S. Courtenage, G. Horrocks, A. Arvaniti, and I. Tsimpli, 171���182. London: University of Westminster.
  66. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., N. Katsos, and L. Stockall. 2019b. ���Generalizing About Striking Properties: Do Glippets Love to Play With Fire?��� Frontiers in Psychology 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01971.
  67. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., and L. Stockall. 2013. ���Genericity, Exceptions and Domain Restriction: Experimental Evidence From Comparison With Universals.��� In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 17, edited by E. Chemla, V. Homer, and G. Winterstein, 325���343. Paris: ��cole Normale Sup��rieure.
  68. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., L. Stockall, and N. Katsos. 2017. ���A New Look at the ���Generic Overgeneralisation��� Effect.��� Inquiry 66, no. 9: 1655���1681. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2017.1285993.
  69. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., L. Stockall, and N. Katsos. 2019. ���Contextualising Generic and Universal Generalisations: Quantifier Domain Restriction and the Generic Overgeneralisation Effect.��� Journal of Semantics 36, no. 4: 617���664.
  70. Lazaridou���Chatzigoga, D., L. Stockall, and N. Katsos. 2023. ���A New Look at the ���Generic Overgeneralisation��� Effect.��� Inquiry 66, no. 9: 1655���1681. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2017.1285993.
  71. Lee, J., and A. Nguyen. 2022. ���What's Positive and Negative About Generics: A Constrained Indexical Approach.��� Philosophical Studies 179, no. 5: 1739���1761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098���021���01727���9.
  72. Lerner, A., and S.���J. Leslie. 2016. ���Generics and Experimental Philosophy.��� In A Companion to Experimental Philosophy, 404���416. Oxford, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118661666.ch28.
  73. Leslie, S.���J. 2007. ���Generics and the Structure of the Mind.��� Philosophical Perspectives 21, no. 1: 375���403. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1520���8583.2007.00138.x.
  74. Leslie, S.���J. 2008. ���Generics: Cognition and Acquisition.��� Philosophical Review 117, no. 1: 1���47. https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108���2007���023.
  75. Leslie, S.���J. 2012. ���Generics Articulate Default Generalizations.��� Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 41: 41. https://doi.org/10.4000/rlv.2048.
  76. Leslie, S.���J. 2014. ���Carving up the Social World With Generics.��� In Oxford Studies in Experimental Philosophy, edited by J. Knobe, T. Lombrozo, and S. Nichols, 208���231. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  77. Leslie, S.���J. 2017. ���The Original Sin of Cognition.��� Journal of Philosophy 114, no. 8: 393���421. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2017114828.
  78. Leslie, S.���J., and S. A. Gelman. 2012. ���Quantified Statements Are Recalled as Generics: Evidence From Preschool Children and Adults.��� Cognitive Psychology 64, no. 3: 186���214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.12.001.
  79. Leslie, S.���J., S. Khemlani, and S. Glucksberg. 2011. ���Do all Ducks Lay Eggs? The Generic Overgeneralization Effect.��� Journal of Memory and Language 65, no. 1: 15���31.
  80. Leslie, S.���J., and A. Lerner. 2016. ���Generic Generalizations.��� Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/generics/.
  81. Liebesman, D., and R. K. Sterken. 2021. ���Generics and the Metaphysics of Kinds.��� Philosophy Compass 16, no. 7: e12754.
  82. Mandalaywala, T. 2020. ���Does Essentialism Lead to Racial Prejudice? It Is Not So Black and White.��� In Advances in Child Development and Behavior, vol. 59, 195���245. San Diego, CA: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.acdb.2020.05.007.
  83. Mannheim, B., S. A. Gelman, C. Escalante, M. Huayhua, and R. Puma. 2010. ���A Developmental Analysis of Generic Nouns in Southern Peruvian Quechua.��� Language Learning and Development 7, no. 1: 1���23.
  84. Mari, A., and D. P. F. Beyssade, eds. 2013. Genericity. New York, NY: OUP.
  85. Mauri, C. 2017. ���Building and Lnterpreting Ad Hoc Categories: A Linguistic Analysis.��� In Formal Models in the Study of Language, edited by J. Blochowiak, C. Grisot, St. Durrleman, and Ch. Laenzlinger, 297���326. Cham: Springer.
  86. McKeever, M., and R. Sterken. 2021. ���Social and Political Aspects of Generic Language and Speech.��� In The Routledge Handbook of Social and Political Philosophy of Language. New York, NY: Routledge.
  87. Medin, D. L. 1989. ���Concepts and Conceptual Structure.��� American Psychologist 44, no. 12: 1469���1481. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003���066X.44.12.1469.
  88. Mendia, J. A. 2020. ���Reference to Ad Hoc Kinds.��� Linguistics and Philosophy 43: 589���631.
  89. Meyer, M., S. A. Gelman, and S. M. Stilwell. 2011. ���Generics Are a Cognitive Default: Evidence From Sentence Processing, 33.���
  90. Neufeld, E. 2022. ���Psychological Essentialism and the Structure of Concepts.��� Philosophy Compass 17, no. 5: e12823. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12823.
  91. Nguyen, A. 2019. ���The Radical Account of Bare Plural Generics.��� Philosophical Studies 1���29: 1303���1331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098���019���01254���8.
  92. Nickel, B. 2016. Between Logic and the World: An Integrated Theory of Generics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  93. Noyes, A., and F. C. Keil. 2019. ���Generics Designate Kinds but Not Always Essences.��� Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116, no. 41: 20354���20359. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.1900105116.
  94. Park, M., E. Leahey, and R. J. Funk. 2023. ���Papers and Patents Are Becoming Less Disruptive Over Time.��� Nature 613, no. 7942: 138���144.
  95. Partee, B. H. 1995. ���Quantificational Structures and Compositionality.��� In Quantification in Natural Languages, 541���601. Springer.
  96. Pesetsky, D. 1987. ���Wh���In���Situ: Movement and Unselective Binding.��� Representation of (in) Definiteness 98: 98���129.
  97. Peters, U., A. Krauss, and O. Braganza. 2022. ���Generalization Bias in Science.��� Cognitive Science 46, no. 9: e13188.
  98. Plunkett, D., R. K. Sterken, and T. Sundell. 2023. ���Generics and Metalinguistic Negotiation.��� Synthese 201, no. 50: 1���46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229���022���03862���0.
  99. Prasada, S., and E. M. Dillingham. 2006. ���Principled and Statistical Connections in Common Sense Conception.��� Cognition 99, no. 1: 73���112. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COGNITION.2005.01.003.
  100. Prasada, S., and E. M. Dillingham. 2009. ���Representation of Principled Connections: A Window Onto the Formal Aspect of Common Sense Conception.��� Cognitive Science 33, no. 3: 401���448. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551���6709.2009.01018.x.
  101. Prasada, S., S. Khemlani, S.���J. Leslie, and S. Glucksberg. 2013. ���Conceptual Distinctions Amongst Generics.��� Cognition 126, no. 3: 405���422.
  102. Ralethe, S., and J. Buys. 2022. ���Generic Overgeneralization in Pre���Trained Language Models.��� In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, edited by N. Calzolari, C.���R. Huang, H. Kim, et al., 3187���3196. Gyeongju, Republic of Korea: International Committee on Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/2022.coling���1.282.
  103. Reuter, K., E. Neufeld, and G. Del Pinal. 2023. ���Asymmetry Effects in Generic and Quantified Generalizations.��� Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 45. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4zk277m7.
  104. Reuter, K., E. Neufeld, and G. Del Pinal. 2025. ���Generics and Quantified Generalizations: Asymmetry Effects and Strategic Communicators.��� Cognition 256: 106004.
  105. Rhodes, M., S. A. Gelman, and S.���J. Leslie. 2024. ���How Generic Language Shapes the Development of Social Thought.��� Trends in Cognitive Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2024.09.012.
  106. Rhodes, M., S. J. Leslie, L. Bianchi, and L. Chalik. 2018a. ���The Role of Generic Language in the Early Development of Social Categorization.��� Child Development 89, no. 1: 148���155.
  107. Rhodes, M., S. J. Leslie, K. Saunders, Y. Dunham, and A. Cimpian. 2018b. ���How Does Social Essentialism Affect the Development of Inter���Group Relations?��� Developmental Science 21, no. 1: e12509.
  108. Rhodes, M., S. J. Leslie, and C. M. Tworek. 2012. ���Cultural Transmission of Social Essentialism.��� Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 109, no. 34: 13526���13531. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1208951109.
  109. Rhodes, M., and T. Mandalaywala. 2017. ���The Development and Developmental Consequences of Social Essentialism.��� Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 8, no. 4: e1437. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1437.
  110. Ritchie, K. 2019. ���Should we Use Racial and Gender Generics? Thought: A.��� Journal of Philosophy 8, no. 1: 33���41. https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.402.
  111. Rosola, M., and F. Cella. 2020. ���Generics and Epistemic Injustice.��� Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23, no. 5: 739���754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677���020���10095���y.
  112. Salomon, E., and A. Cimpian. 2014. ���The Inherence Heuristic as a Source of Essentialist Thought.��� Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40, no. 10: 1297���1315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214541659.
  113. Saul, J. 2017. ���Are Generics Especially Pernicious?��� Inquiry 66, no. 9: 1682���1699. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2017.1285995.
  114. Scontras, G., M. H. Tessler, and M. Franke. 2021. ���A Practical Introduction to the Rational Speech Act Modeling Framework.��� arXiv:2105.09867.
  115. Shahbazi, G., S. Hossein, T. M. Mandalaywala, K. Borhani, and T. Davoodi. 2024. ���When Do Generics Lead to Essentialism: Developmental Evidence From Iran.��� Infant and Child Development 33: e2538. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2538.
  116. Sorensen, R. 2012. ���The Sorites and the Generic Overgeneralization Effect.��� Analysis 72, no. 3: 444���449.
  117. Sterken, R. K. 2015a. ���Generics, Content and Cognitive Bias.��� Analytic Philosophy 56, no. 1: 75���93. https://doi.org/10.1111/phib.12056.
  118. Sterken, R. K. 2015b. ���Generics in Context.��� Philosophers' Imprint 15, no. 1: 1���30.
  119. Tardif, T., S. A. Gelman, X. Fu, and L. Zhu. 2012. ���Acquisition of Generic Noun Phrases in Chinese: Learning About Lions Without an ������s���.��� Journal of Child Language 39, no. 1: 130���161.
  120. Tasimi, A., S. A. Gelman, A. Cimpian, and J. Knobe. 2017. ���Differences in the Evaluation of Generic Statements About Human and Non���Human Categories.��� Cognitive Science 41, no. 7: 1934���1957. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12440.
  121. Tessler, M. H., and N. D. Goodman. 2019. ���The Language of Generalization.��� Psychological Review 126, no. 3: 395���436. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000142.
  122. van Rooij, R., and K. Schulz. 2020. ���Generics and Typicality: A Bounded Rationality Approach.��� Linguistics and Philosophy 43, no. 1: 83���117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988���019���09265���8.
  123. Vasilyeva, N., and S. Ayala���L��pez. 2019. ���Structural Thinking and Epistemic Injustice.��� In Overcoming Epistemic Injustice: Social and Psychological Perspectives, edited by B. R. Sherman and S. Goguen. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield International.
  124. Vasilyeva, N., A. Gopnik, and T. Lombrozo. 2018. ���The Development of Structural Thinking About Social Categories.��� Developmental Psychology 54, no. 9: 1735���1744. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000555.
  125. Vasilyeva, N., A. Gopnik, and T. Lombrozo. 2020. ���When Generic Language Does not Promote Psychological Essentialism.��� In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society.
  126. Vasilyeva, N., and T. Lombrozo. 2020. ���Structural Thinking About Social Categories: Evidence From Formal Explanations, Generics, and Generalization.��� Cognition 204: 104383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104383.
  127. Von Fintel, K.���U. 1994. ���Restrictions on Quantifier Domains.��� Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest, 1���295.
  128. Warriner, A. B., V. Kuperman, and M. Brysbaert. 2013. ���Norms of Valence, Arousal, and Dominance for 13915 English Lemmas.��� Behaviour Research Methods 45: 1191���1207.
  129. Wilson, D., and R. Carston. 2007. ���A Unitary Approach to Lexical Pragmatics: Relevance, Inference and Ad Hoc Concepts.��� In Pragmatics, 230���260. London, UK: Palgrave.
  130. Wodak, D., and S. J. Leslie. 2017. ���The Mark of the Plural: Generic Generalizations and Race.��� In The Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Race, 277���289. New York, NY: Routledge.
  131. Wodak, D., S. J. Leslie, and M. Rhodes. 2015. ���What a Loaded Generalization: Generics and Social Cognition.��� Philosophy Compass 10, no. 9: 625���635. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12250.

MeSH Term

Humans
Language
Social Cognition
Stereotyping
Journal Article Review
Article has an altmetric score of 3

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0genericssocialresearchprogramcognitivecognitionhypothesisAccordinginfluentialsciencephilosophylinguisticsdeepspecialconnectionperniciousaspectsstereotypingSpecificallythoughtexacerbatepropensityessentializeleadusovergeneralizebasedscarceevidenceepistemicallydubiouspatternsinferenceRecentlyhoweverseveralstudiesputempiricaltheoreticalpressuremaintenetsgoalpaperbringresultstogethercomprehensivenarrativesystematicallyevaluateimpactuniquelyproblematiceffectcapacitiesGivingGenericLanguageAnotherThoughtgenerics���as���defaultspsychologicalessentialismstereotypes

Similar Articles

Cited By