Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Review (1)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (3)
Keywords
- representation (3) (remove)
A crucial question facing cognitive science concerns the nature of conceptual representations as well as the constraints on the interactions between them. One specific question we address in this paper is what makes cross-representational interplay possible? We offer two distinct theoretical scenarios: according to the first scenario, co-activated knowledge representations interact with the help of an interface established between them via congruent activation in a mediating third-party general cognitive mechanism, e.g., attention. According to the second scenario, co-activated knowledge representations interact due to an overlap between their features, for example when they share a magnitude component. First, we make a case for cross representational interplay based on grounded and situated theories of cognition. Second, we discuss interface-based interactions between distinct (i.e., non-overlapping) knowledge representations. Third, we discuss how co-activated representations may share their architecture via partial overlap. Finally, we outline constraints regarding the flexibility of these proposed mechanisms.
From self-help books and nootropics, to self-tracking and home health tests, to the tinkering with technology and biological particles – biohacking brings biology, medicine, and the material foundation of life into the sphere of »do-it-yourself«. This trend has the potential to fundamentally change people's relationship with their bodies and biology but it also creates new cultural narratives of responsibility, authority, and differentiation. Covering a broad range of examples, this book explores practices and representations of biohacking in popular culture, discussing their ambiguous position between empowerment and requirement, promise and prescription.
Introduction:
We aim to highlight the utility of this model in the analysis of the psycho-behavioral implications of family cancer, presenting the scientific literature that used Leventhal’s model as the theoretical framework of approach.
Material and methods:
A systematic search was performed in six databases (EBSCO, ScienceDirect, PubMed Central, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science) with empirical studies published between 2006 and 2015 in English with regard to the Common Sense Model of Self-Regulation (CSMR) and familial/hereditary cancer. The key words used were: illness representations, common sense model, self regulatory model, familial/hereditary/genetic cancer, genetic cancer counseling. The selection of studies followed the PRISMA-P guidelines (Moher et al., 2009; Shamseer et al., 2015), which suggest a three-stage procedure.
Results:
Individuals create their own cognitive and emotional representation of the disease when their health is threatened, being influenced by the presence of a family history of cancer, causing them to adopt or not a salutogenetic behavior. Disease representations, particularly the cognitive ones, can be predictors of responses to health threats that determine different health behaviors. Age, family history of cancer, and worrying about the disease are factors associated with undergoing screening. No consensus has been reached as to which factors act as predictors of compliance with cancer screening programs.
Conclusions:
This model can generate interventions that are conceptually clear as well as useful in regulating the individuals’ behaviors by reducing the risk of developing the disease and by managing as favorably as possible health and/or disease.