Ahn, W. K. 1998. Why are different features central for natural kinds and artifacts? The role of causal status in determining feature centrality. Cognition 69: 135–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ahn, W. K., & Dennis, M. J. 2001. Dissociation between categorization and similarity judgement: Differential effect of causal status on feature weights. In Hahn, U. & Ramscar, M. (eds.): Similarity and Categorization, pp. 87–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ahn, W. K., Kalish, C. W., Medin, D. L., & Gelman, S. A. 1995. The role of covariation versus mechanism information in causal attribution. Cognition 54: 299–352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Amaldi, E. 1984. From the discovery of the neutron to the discovery of nuclear fission. Physics Reports 111: 1–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 1996. Categorization, anomalies and the discovery of nuclear fission. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 27: 463–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H., Barker, P., & Chen, X. 1996. Kuhn's mature philosophy of science and cognitive psychology. Philosophical Psychology 9: 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Apian, P. 1540. Petri Apiani Cosmographia. Phrysius, G. (ed.). Antwerp: A. Berckman.Google Scholar

Ariew, R. 1987. The phases of Venus before 1610. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 15: 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ariew, R. 1999. Descartes and the Last Scholastics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Armstrong, S., Gleitman, L., & Gleitman, H. 1983. On what some concepts might not be. Cognition 13: 263–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baltas, A., Gavroglu, K., & Kindi, V. 1997. A physicist who became a historian for philosophical purposes: A discussion between Thomas S. Kuhn and Aristides Baltas, Kostas Gavroglu, and Vassiliki Kindi. Neusis 6: 145–200. Reprinted as: A Discussion with Thomas S. Kuhn. In J. Conant & J. Haugeland (eds.): The Road Since Structure, pp. 253–323. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2000.Google Scholar

Barker, P. 1990. Copernicus, the orbs and the equant. Synthese 83: 317–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 1998. Kuhn and the sociological revolution. Configurations 6: 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 1999. Copernicus and the critics of Ptolemy. Journal for the History of Astronomy 30: 343–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 2000. The role of religion in the Lutheran response to Copernicus. In Osler, M. J. (ed.): Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, pp. 59–88. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 2001. Incommensurability and conceptual change during the Copernican revolution. In Sankey, H. & Hoyningen-Huene, P. (eds.): Incommensurability and Related Matters, pp. 241–273. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Barker, P. 2002. Constructing Copernicus. Perspectives on Science 10: 208–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P., Chen, X., & Andersen, H. 2003. Kuhn on concepts and categorization. In Nickles, T. (ed.): Thomas Kuhn, pp. 212–245. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Barker, P., & Goldstein, B. R. 1994. Distance and velocity in Kepler's astronomy. Annals of Science 51: 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P., & Goldstein, B. R. 1998. Realism and instrumentalism in sixteenth century astronomy: A reappraisal. Perspectives on Science 6: 232–258.Google Scholar

Barnes, B. 1974. Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Barnes, B. 1982. Thomas Kuhn and Social Science. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1982. Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition 11: 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1985. Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11: 629–654.Google ScholarPubMed

Barsalou, L. W. 1987. The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In Neisser, U. (ed.): Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, pp. 101–140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1988. The concept and organization of autobiographical memories. In Neisser, U. & Winograd, E. (eds.): Remembering Reconsidered: Ecological and Traditional Approaches to the Study of Memory, pp. 193–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1989. Intraconcept similarity and its implications for interconcept similarity. In Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A. (eds.): Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, pp. 76–121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1990. On the indistinguishability of exemplar memory and abstraction in category representation. In Srull, T. & Wyer, R. (eds.): Advances in Social Cognition, Vol. 3, pp. 61–88. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1991. Deriving categories to achieve goals. In Bower, G. H. (ed.): The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory, Vol. 27, pp. 1–64. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1992a. Cognitive Psychology: An Overview for Cognitive Scientists. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1992b. Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In Lehrer, A. & Kittay, E. (eds.): Frames, Fields and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantical and Lexical Organization, pp. 21–74. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1993. Flexibility, structure and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In Collins, A. F., Gathercole, S. E., Conway, M. A., & Morris, P. E. (eds.): Theories of Memory, pp. 31–101. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 577–609.Google ScholarPubMed

Barsalou, L. W., & Billman, D. 1989. Systematicity and semantic ambiguity. In Gorfein, D. (ed.): Resolving Semantic Ambiguity, pp. 146–203. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Hale, C. 1993. Components of conceptual representation: From feature-lists to recursive frames. In Mechelen, I., Hampton, J., Michalski, R., & Theuns, P. (eds.): Categories and Concepts: Theoretical Views and Inductive Data Analysis, pp. 97–144. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Sewell, D. 1984. Constructing Representations of Categories from Different Points of View. Emory Cognition Project Report No. 2. Atlanta: Emory University.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Sewell, D. 1985. Contrasting the representation of scripts and categories. Journal of Memory and Language 24: 646–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., Solomon, K., & Wu, L. 1999. Perceptual simulation in conceptual tasks. In Hiraga, M., Sinha, C., & Wilcox, S. (eds.): Cultural, Typological, and Psychological Perspectives in Cognitive Linguistics: The Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the International Cognitive Linguistics Association, Vol. 3, pp. 209–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bartlett, F. C. 1932. Remembering. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bechtel, W. 1988. Philosophy of Mind: An Overview for Cognitive Science. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. 1991. Connectionism and the Mind: An Introduction to Parallel Processing in Networks. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896a. Sur les radiations émises par phosphorescence. Comptes Rendus 122: 420–421.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896b. Sur les radiations invisibles émises par les corps phosphorescents. Comptes Rendus 122: 501–503.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896c. Sur quelques propriétés nouvelles des radiations invisibles émises par divers corps phosphorescents. Comptes Rendus 122: 559–564.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896d. Sur diverses propriétés des rayons uraniques. Comptes Rendus 123: 855–858.Google Scholar

Biagioli, M. 1990. The anthropology of incommensurability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 21: 183–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biagioli, M. 1994. Galileo Courtier. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Black, E. 1977. Manual of Neotropical Birds, Vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Bloor, D. 1976/1991. Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 2nd ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Bloor, D. 1983. Wittgenstein: A Social Theory of Knowledge. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bloor, D. 2002. Wittgenstein, Rules and Institutions. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bohr, N. 1936. Neutron capture and nuclear constitution. Nature 137: 344–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bohr, N., & Wheeler, J. A. 1939. The mechanism of nuclear fission. Physical Review 56: 426–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

di Bono, M. 1995. Copernicus, Amico, Fracastoro and Tusi's device: Observations on the use and transmission of a model. Journal for the History of Astronomy 26: 133–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bourdieu, P. 2001. Science de la science et réflexivité. Paris: Raisons d'agir.Google Scholar

Bower, C., Black, J., & Turner, T. 1979. Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology 11: 177–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boyd, R. 1979. Metaphor and theory change: What is “metaphor” a metaphor for? In Ortony, A. (ed.): Metaphor and Thought, pp. 356–408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brahe, T. 1588. De mundi aetherei recentioribus phaenomenis. Uraniburg:i.a.Google Scholar

Braybrooke, D., & Rosenberg, A. 1972. Getting the war news straight: The actual situation in philosophy of science. American Political Science Review 66: 818–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brewer, W. 2000. Bartlett's concept of the schema and its impact on theories of knowledge representation in contemporary cognitive psychology. In Saito, A. (ed.): Bartlett, Culture and Cognition, pp. 69–89. Hove, England: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Brooks, L. R. 1987. Decentralized control of categorization: The role of prior processing episodes. In Neisser, U. (ed.): Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, pp. 141–174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brown, N. R., Shevell, S. K., & Rips, L. J. 1987. Public memories and their personal context. In Rubin, D. (ed.): Autobiographical Memory, pp. 137–158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Buchwald, J. 1992. Kinds and the wave theory of light. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 23: 39–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cantor, N., Smith, E. E., French, R. D., & Mezzich, J. 1980. Psychiatric diagnosis as prototype organization. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 89: 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carey, S. 1985. Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carey, S. 1991/1999. Knowledge acquisition: Enrichment or conceptual change? In Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (eds.): Concepts: Core Readings, pp. 459–487. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carr, E. H. 1961. What Is History?London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Chen, X. 1995. Taxonomic changes and the particle-wave debate in early nineteenth-century Britain. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 26: 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, X. 1997. Thomas Kuhn's latest notion of incommensurability. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 28: 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, X. 2003. Why did John Herschel fail to understand polarization? The differences between object and event concepts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34: 491–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, X., Andersen, H., & Barker, P. 1998. Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions and cognitive psychology. Philosophical Psychology 11: 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. 1981. Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Sciences 5: 121–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christianson, J. R. 1999. On Tycho's Island. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Churchland, P. 1989. A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Clark, A. 1993. Associative Engines: Connectionism, Concepts and Representational Change. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Collins, H. M. 1981. What is TRASP? The radical programme as a methodological imperative. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11: 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, H. M., & Pinch, T. 1993. The Golem: What Everyone Should Know about Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Conklin, H. C. 1969. Lexicographical treatment of folk taxonomies. In Tyler, S. A. (ed.): Cognitive Anthropology, pp. 41–49. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

Coulson, S. 2001. Semantic Leaps: Frame Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Covey, S. R. 1990. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Curd, M., & Cover, J. A. 1998. Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Curie, I., & Joliot, F. 1934. Un nouveau type de radioactivité. Comptes Rendus 198: 254–256.Google Scholar

Curie, M. 1898. Rayons émis par les composés de l'uranium et du thorium. Comptes Rendus 126: 1101–1103.Google Scholar

Curie, P., & Curie, M. 1898. Sur une substance nouvelle radio-active, contenue dans la pechblende. Comptes Rendus 127: 175–178.Google Scholar

Curie, P., Curie, M., & Bémont, G. 1898. Sur une nouvelle substance fortement radio-active, contenue dans la pechblende. Comptes Rendus 127: 1215– 1217.Google Scholar

Darden, L. 1992. Strategies for anomaly resolution. In Giere, R. (ed.): Cognitive Models of Science, pp. 251–273. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XV. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Darden, L. 1998. Exemplars, abstractions, and anomalies: Representation and theory change in Mendelian and molecular genetics. In Wolters, G., Lennox, J. G., & McLaughlin, P. (eds.): Concepts, Theories and Rationality in the Biological Sciences: The Second Pittsburgh-Konstanz Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 137–158. Konstanz/Pittsburgh: Universitätsverlag Konstanz/University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar

Donahue, W. H. 1988. Kepler's fabricated figures: Covering up the mess in the New Astronomy. Journal for the History of Astronomy 19: 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donahue, W. H. 1992. Johannes Kepler – New Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drake, S. 1990. Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo. New York: Anchor Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Ellsworth, P. 1972. Emotion in the Human Face. Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Erreich, A., & Valian, V. 1979. Children's internal organization of locative categories. Child Development 50: 1070–1077.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Evans, J. 1998. The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Evans, R. J. 1999. In Defense of History. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Feather, N., & Bretcher, E. 1939. Atomic numbers of the so-called transuranic elements. Nature 143: 516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fermi, E. 1934. Possible production of elements of atomic number higher than 92. Nature 133: 898–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fermi, E. 1939. Artificial radioactivity produced by neutron bombardment. Nobel Lecture. Reprinted in E. Fermi, Collected Papers, Vol. 1: Italy 1921–1938, pp. 1037–1043. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar

Flügge, S. 1939. Kann der Energiegehalt der Atomkerne technisch nutzbar gemacht werden. Die Naturwissenschaften 27: 402–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gadow, H. 1892. On the classification of birds. Proceedings of the General Meeting for Scientific Business of the Zoological Society of London 1892, pp. 229–256.Google Scholar

Galilei, Galileo 1610/1989. Sidereus nuncius, or the Sidereal Messenger. Translated with introduction, conclusion, and notes by Albert Van Helden. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Gamow, G. 1929a. Über die Struktur des Atomkerns. Physikalische Zeitschrift 30: 717–720.Google Scholar

Gamow, G. 1929b. Zur Quantentheorie der Atomzertrümmerung. Zeitschrift der Physik 52: 510–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gamow, G. 1931. Constitution of Atomic Nuclei and Radioactivity. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. 1988. Metaphor as structure mapping: The relational shift. Child Development 59: 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giere, R. 1988. Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giere, R. (ed.) 1992. Cognitive Models of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Giere, R., 1994. The cognitive structure of scientific theories. Philosophy of Science 61: 276–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gingerich, O. 1975. “Crisis” versus aesthetic in the Copernican Revolution. In Beer, A. (ed.): Vistas in Astronomy, Vol. 17, pp. 85–94. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar

Gingerich, O. 1993. Erasmus Reinhold and the dissemination of the Copernican theory. In O. Gingerich: The Eye of Heaven. New York: American Institute of Physics.Google Scholar

Goldstein, B. R. 1991. The blasphemy of Alfonso X: History or myth? In Barker, Peter & Ariew, Roger (eds.): Revolution and Continuity: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Early Modern Science, pp. 143–153. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar

Goldstein, B. R., & Barker, P. 1995. The role of Rothmann in the dissolution of the celestial spheres. British Journal for the History of Science 28: 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldstone, R. L., Medin, D. L., & Gentner, D. 1991. Relational similarity and the nonindependence of features in similarity judgments. Cognitive Psychology 23: 222–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Golinski, J. 1990. The theory of practice and the practice of theory: Sociological approaches in the history of science. Isis 81: 492–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gooding, D. 1990. Experiment and the Making of Meaning. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gopnick, A., & Meltzoff, A. 1997. Words, Thoughts and Theories. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hacking, I. 1993. Working in a new world: The taxonomic solution. In Horwich, P. (ed.): World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science, pp. 275–310. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hahn, D. (ed.) 1975. Otto Hahn: Erlebnisse und Erkenntnisse. Düsseldorf: Econ Verlag.Google Scholar

Hahn, O. 1946. Von den natürlichen Umwandlungen des Urans zu seiner künstlichen Zerspaltung, Nobel-Vortrag am 13. Dez. 1946. In O. Hahn: Mein Leben, pp. 247–267. Bruckmann: München 1968.Google Scholar

Hahn, O., & Strassmann, F. 1938. Über die Entstehung von Radiumisotopen aus Uran durch Bestrahlen mit schnellen und verlangsammten Neutronen. Die Naturwissenschaften 26: 755–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halban, H., Joliot, F., & Kowarski, L. 1939a. Liberation of neutrons in the nuclear explosion of uranium. Nature 143: 70–71.Google Scholar

Halban, H., Joliot, F., & Kowarski, L. 1939b. Number of neutrons liberated in the nuclear fission of uranium. Nature 143: 680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamel, J. 1998. Die astronomische Forschungen in Kassel unter Wilhelm IV. Thun and Frankfurt am Main: Harri Deutsch.Google Scholar

Heider, E. R. 1972. Universals in color naming and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology 93: 10–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Helden, A. 1985. Measuring the Universe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Henry, C. 1896. Augmentation du rendement photographique des rayons Röntgen par le sulfure de zinc phosphorescent. Comptes Rendus 122: 312–314.Google Scholar

Homa, D., & Vosburgh, R. 1976. Category breadth and the abstraction of prototypical information. Journal of Experimental Psychology – Human Learning and Memory 2: 322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoyningen-Huene, P. 1993. Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hoyningen-Huene, P., & Sankey, H. 2001. Incommensurability and Related Matters. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kay, P. 1971. Taxonomy and semantic contrast. Language 447: 866–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keil, F. 1989. Concepts, Kinds and Cognitive Development. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kendler, T., & Kendler, H. 1970. An ontogeny of optical shift behavior. Child Development 41: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kepler, J. 1596. Mysterium Cosmographicum. Tübingen: G. Gruppenbachius.Google Scholar

Kepler, J. 1609. Astronomia Nova. Heidelberg: G. Voegelinus. Translated by W. H. Donahue, as: Johannes Kepler: New Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar

Kepler, J. 1618–1622. Epitome Astronomiae Copernicanae. Linz: Plancus, & Frankfurt: Tampachius.Google Scholar

Krafft, F. 1981. Im Schatten der Sensation: Leben und Wirken von Fritz Strassmann. Weinhein: Verlag Chemie.Google Scholar

Kragh, H. 1999. Quantum Generations: A History of Physics in the Twentieth Century. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1957. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1959. The essential tension: Tradition and innovation in scientific research. In Taylor, C. W. & Barron, F. (eds.): Scientific Creativity: Its Recognition and Development, pp. 341–354. New York: John Wiley. Reprinted in Kuhn (1977), pp. 225–259.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1970a. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1970b. Reflections on my critics. In Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, A. (eds.): Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp. 231–278. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1974. Second thoughts on paradigms. In Suppe, F. (ed.): The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 459–482. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Reprinted in Kuhn (1977), pp. 293–319.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1976. Theory-change as structure-change: Comments on the Sneed formalism. Erkenntnis 10: 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1977. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1979. Metaphor in science. In Ortony, A. (ed.): Metaphor and Thought, pp. 533–542. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 196–207.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1983a. Commensurability, comparability, communicability. PSA 1982 2: 669–688.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1983b. Response to commentaries. In PSA 1982 2: 712–716. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 53–57.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1989. Possible worlds in history of science. In Allén, S. (ed.): Possible Worlds in Humanities, Arts and Sciences: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 65, pp. 9–32. Berlin: de Gruyter. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 58–89.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1990. Dubbing and redubbing: The vulnerability of rigid designation. In Savage, C. W. (ed.): Scientific Theories, pp. 298–318. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XIV. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1991. The road since Structure. PSA 1990 2: 3–13.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1992. The trouble with the historical philosophy of science. Robert and Maureen Rothschild Distinguished Lecture, 19 Nov. 1991. Cambridge, Mass.: Department of the History of Science, Harvard University. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 105–120.

Kuhn, T. S. 1993. Afterwords. In Horwich, P. (ed.): World Changes, pp. 311–341. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 2000. The Road since Structure. Conant, J. & Haugeland, J. (eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S., Shapere, D., Bromberger, S., Suppes, P., Putnam, H., & Achinstein, P. 1974. Discussion. In Suppe, F. (ed.): The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 500–517. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

Lakatos, I. 1978. The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. 1970. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Latour, B. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Lattis, J. 1994. Between Copernicus and Galileo: Christopher Clavius and the Collapse of Ptolemaic Astronomy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laudan, L. 1977. Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. London: Routledge & Keagan Paul.Google Scholar

Loocke, P. (ed.) 1999. The Nature of Concepts: Evolution, Structure and Representation. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maestlin, M. 1578. Observatio et demonstratio cometae aetherei … anno 1577 et 1588. Tübingen: Gruppenbach.Google Scholar

Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. J., & Thagard, P. 1999. Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malt, B. C., & Smith, E. E. 1984. Correlated properties in natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23: 250–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Margolis, E., & Laurence, S. (eds.) 1999. Concepts: Core Readings. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Margolis, H. 2002. It Started with Copernicus: How Turning the World Inside Out Led to the Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

McMillan, E. 1939. Radioactive recoil from uranium activated by neutrons. Physical Review 55: 510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Medin, D. L. 1989. Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist 44: 1469–1481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Medin, D., Altom, M., Edelson, S., & Freko, D. 1982. Correlated symptoms and simulated medical classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 8: 37–50.Google ScholarPubMed

Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. 1978. Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 86: 207–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meitner, L., & Delbrück, M. 1935. Der Aufbau der Atomkerne. Natürliche und künstliche Kernumwandlungen. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Meitner, L., & Frisch, O. 1939. Disintegration of uranium by neutrons: A new type of nuclear reaction. Nature 143: 239–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meitner, L., & Hahn, O. 1936. Neue Umwandlungsprozess bei Bestrahlung des Urans mit Neutronen. Naturwissenschaften 24: 158–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Melanchthon, P. 1549/1846. Initia Doctrinae Physicae. In Bretschneider, C. G. (ed.): Corpus Reformatorum, Vol. 13; pp. 1179–1412. Halis Saxonum: Schwetschke et Filius. Reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint, 1964.Google Scholar

Mervis, C. B., & Pani, J. R. 1980. Acquisition of basic object categories. Cognitive Psychology 12: 496–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. 1981. Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology 32: 89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minsky, M. 1975. A framework for representing knowledge. In Winston, P. (ed.): The Psychology of Computer Vision, pp. 211–277. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. L. 1985. The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 92: 289–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Murphy, G., & Medin, D. (1985/1999). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. In Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (eds.): Concepts: Core Readings, pp. 425–458. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Murphy, G., & Smith, E. 1982. Basic-level superiority in picture categorization. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 21: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1984. Faraday to Einstein: Constructing Meaning in Scientific Theories. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1987. A cognitive-historical approach to meaning in scientific theories. In Nersessian, N. (ed.): The Process of Science, pp. 161–177. Dordrecht, Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1989. Conceptual change in science and in science education. Synthese 80: 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1992a. How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In Giere, R. N. (ed.): Cognitive Models of Science, pp. 3–45. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1992b. In the theoretician's laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. PSA 2: 291–301.

Nersessian, N. J. 1995. Opening the black box: Cognitive science and the history of science. In A. Thackray (ed.): Constructing Knowledge in the History of Science. Osiris 10: 194–214.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1998. Conceptual change. In Bechtel, W. & Graham, G. (eds.): A Companion to Cognitive Science, pp. 155–166. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1999. Model-based reasoning in conceptual change. In Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. J., & Thagard, P. (eds.): Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery, pp. 5–22. New York: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 2001. Maxwell and “the method of physical analogy”: Model-based reasoning, generic abstraction, and conceptual change. In Malament, D. (ed.): Reading Philosophy of Nature: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science and Mathematics to Honor Howard Stein on his 70th Birthday, pp. 129–166. LaSalle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 2003. Kuhn, conceptual change and cognitive science. In Nickles, T. (ed.): Thomas Kuhn, pp. 178–211. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J., & Andersen, H. 1998. Conceptual change and incommensurability: A cognitive-historical view. Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 32: 111–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J., & Magnani, L. 2002. Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, and Values. New York: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Neugebauer, O. 1968. On the planetary theory of Copernicus. Vistas in Astronomy 10: 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Newton, A. 1893. A Dictionary of Birds. London: Adam and Charles Black.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nickles, T. 2003. Normal science: From logic to case-based and model-based reasoning. In Nickles, T. (ed.): Thomas Kuhn, pp. 142–177. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Niewenglowski, G. H. 1896. Sur la propriété qu'ont les radiations émises par les corps phosphorescents, de traverser certains corps opaques à la lumière solaire, et sur les expériences de M. G. le Bon, sur la lumière noire. Comptes Rendus 122: 385–386.Google Scholar

Noddack, I. 1934a. Das Periodische System der Elemente und seine Lücken. Angewandte Chemie 47: 301–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Noddack, I. 1934b. Über das Element 93. Angewandte Chemie 47: 653–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nye, M.-J. 1980. N-rays: An episode in the history and psychology of science. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11: 125–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pais, A. 1977. Radioactivity's two early puzzles. Reviews of Modern Physics 49: 925–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pais, A. 1986. Inward Bound: Of Matter and Force in the Physical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Pedersen, O. 1993. Early Physics and Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pickering, A. 1984. Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Pinch, T. 1986. Confronting Nature: The Sociology of Solar-Neutrino Detection. Dordrecht, Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poincaré, H. 1896. Les rayons cathodiques et les rayons de Röntgen. Revue générale des Sciences pures et appliquées 7: 52–59.Google Scholar

Putnam, H. 1975. The meaning of “meaning.” In Gundersen, K. (ed.): Language, Mind and Knowledge, pp. 131–193. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. VII. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Ragep, F. J. 1993. Nasir al-Din al Tusi's Memoir on Astronomy. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Ray, J. 1678. The Ornithology of Francis Willughby. London: John Martyn.Google Scholar

Reinhold, E. 1542. Theoricae novae planetarum Georgii Purbacchii (sic) Germani ab Erasmo Reinholdo Salveldensi. Inserta item methodica tractio de illuminiatione Lunae. Typus Eclipsis solis futurae Anno 1544. Wittenberg: Luft.Google Scholar

Rey, G. 1985. Concepts and conceptions: A reply to Smith, Medin and Rips. Cognition 19: 297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rheticus, G. J. 1540/1979. Narratio prima. Hugonnard-Roche, H.. (eds. and trans.). Wroclaw: Ossolineum, Studia Copernicana 20.Google Scholar

Rhodes, R. 1986. The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Rips, L. J. 1975. Inductive judgements about natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14: 665–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Röntgen, W. K. 1896. Eine neue Art von Strahlen. Würzburg: Stahel'schen K. Hof- und Universitätsbuch- und Kunsthandlung.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. 1973a. Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 4: 328–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosch, E. 1973b. On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In Moore, T. E. (ed.): Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language, pp. 111–144. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. 1978. Principles of categorization. In Rosch, E. & Lloyd, B. B. (eds.): Cognition and Categorization, pp. 27–48. Hillsdale, N.J. : Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. 1987. Wittgenstein and categorization research in cognitive psychology. In Chapman, M. & Dixon, R. A. (eds.): Meaning and the Growth of Understanding: Wittgenstein's Significance for Developmental Psychology, pp. 151–166. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. 1975. Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structures of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7: 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosch, E., Mervis, C., Gray, W., Johnson, D., & Boyes-Braem, P. 1976. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8: 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ross, B., Perkins, S., & Tenpenny, P. 1990. Reminding-based category learning. Cognitive Psychology 22: 460–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rudwick, M. J. S. 1985. The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rutherford, E. 1899. Uranium radiation and the electrical conduction produced by it. Philosophical Magazine 47: 109–163. Reprinted in J. Chadwick (ed.): The Collected Papers of Lord Rutherford of Nelson, pp. 169–215. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1962.Google Scholar

Rutherford, E. 1903. The magnetic and electric deviation of the easily absorbed rays from Radium. Philosophical Magazine 5: 177–187. Reprinted in J. Chadwick (ed.): The Collected Papers of Lord Rutherford of Nelson, pp. 549–557. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1962.Google Scholar

Sankey, H. 1994. The Incommensurability Thesis. Aldershot, England: Avesbury.Google Scholar

Schank, R. C. 1975. Conceptual Information Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar

Schank, R., & Abelson, R. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding. Hillsdale, N.J. : Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Scheffler, I. 1967. Science and Subjectivity. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar

Seaborg, G. 1989. Nuclear fission and transuranic elements – 50 years ago. Journal of Chemical Education 66: 379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapere, D. 1964. The structure of scientific revolutions. Philosophical Review 73: 383–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapere, D. 1982. Reason, reference, and the quest for knowledge. Philosophy of Science 49: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapere, D. 1989. Evolution and continuity in scientific change. Philosophy of Science 56: 419–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapin, S. 1975. Phrenological knowledge and the social structure of early 19th-century Edinburgh. Annals of Science 32: 219–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapin, S. 1982. History of science and its sociological reconstructions. History of Science 20: 157–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. 1984. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Shepp, B. 1978. From perceived similarity to dimensional structure: A new hypothesis about perspective development. In Rosch, E. & Lloyd, B. (eds.): Cognition and Categorization, pp. 135–167. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Sibley, C., & Ahlquist, J. 1990. Phylogeny and Classification of Birds: A Study in Molecular Evolution. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Sloman, S. A., Love, B. C., & Ahn, W. K. 1998. Feature centrality and conceptual coherence. Cognitive Science 22: 189–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, B. H. 1997. Belief and Resistance: Dynamics of Contemporary Intellectual Controversy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Smith, E., Osherson, D., Rips, L., & Keane, M. 1988. Combining prototypes: A selective modification model. Cognitive Sciences 12: 485–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Smith, J. D., & Kemler-Nelson, D. 1984. Overall similarity in adults' classification: The child in all of us. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113: 137–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Solomon, M. 2001. Social Empiricism. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Stein, N. 1992. What's in a story: Interpreting the interpretations of story grammars. Discourse Processes 5: 319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stevenson, B. 1994. Kepler's Physical Astronomy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Stuewer, R. 1994. The origin of the liquid-drop model and the interpretation of nuclear fission. Perspectives on Science 2: 76–129.Google Scholar

Sundevall, C. 1889. Sundevall's Tentamen. London: Porter.Google Scholar

Swerdlow, N. 1976. Pseudodoxia Copernicana. Archives Internationales d'Historie des Sciences 26: 105–158.Google Scholar

Taves, R. 1998. “Frank and Ernest” cartoon published 2-26-1998. NEA Inc.

Thagard, P. 1992. Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Thoren, V. E. 1990. The Lord of Uraniborg: A Biography of Tycho Brahe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Treumann, R. A. 1991. A post-fission perspective of the discovery of nuclear fission. Journal for the General Philosophy of Science 22: 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tversky, A. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 84: 327–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Tversky, B., & Hemenway, K. 1984. Objects, parts, and categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113: 169–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Voelkel, J. R. 2001. The composition of Kepler's Astronomia nova. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Waismann, F. 1965. The Principles of Linguistic Philosophy. Harré, R. (ed.). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Way, E. C. 1997. Connectionism and conceptual structure. American Behavioral Scientist 40: 729–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weart, S. 1983. The discovery of physics and a nuclear physics paradigm. In Shea, W. R. (ed.): Otto Hahn and the Rise of Nuclear Physics, pp. 91–133. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Weizsäcker, F. 1937. Die Atomkerne. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Westman, R. S. 1975. The Melanchthon Circle, Rheticus, and the Wittenberg Interpretation of the Copernican Theory. Isis 66: 165–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Westman, R. 1994. Two cultures or one? A second look at Kuhn's The Copernican Revolution. Isis 85: 79–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Williams, T. M., Freyer, M. L., & Aiken, L. S. 1977. Development of visual pattern classification in preschool children: Prototypes and distinctive features. Developmental Psychology 13: 577–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wisniewski, E., & Medin, D. 1991. Harpoons and long sticks: The interaction of theory and similarity in rule induction. In Fischer, D., Pazzani, M., & Langley, P. (eds.): Concept Formation: Knowledge and Experience in Unsupervised Learning, pp. 237–278. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar

Wittgenstein, L. W. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. G. E. M. Ansceombe (trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Ahn, W. K. 1998. Why are different features central for natural kinds and artifacts? The role of causal status in determining feature centrality. Cognition 69: 135–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ahn, W. K., & Dennis, M. J. 2001. Dissociation between categorization and similarity judgement: Differential effect of causal status on feature weights. In Hahn, U. & Ramscar, M. (eds.): Similarity and Categorization, pp. 87–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ahn, W. K., Kalish, C. W., Medin, D. L., & Gelman, S. A. 1995. The role of covariation versus mechanism information in causal attribution. Cognition 54: 299–352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Amaldi, E. 1984. From the discovery of the neutron to the discovery of nuclear fission. Physics Reports 111: 1–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H. 1996. Categorization, anomalies and the discovery of nuclear fission. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 27: 463–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andersen, H., Barker, P., & Chen, X. 1996. Kuhn's mature philosophy of science and cognitive psychology. Philosophical Psychology 9: 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Apian, P. 1540. Petri Apiani Cosmographia. Phrysius, G. (ed.). Antwerp: A. Berckman.Google Scholar

Ariew, R. 1987. The phases of Venus before 1610. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 15: 213–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ariew, R. 1999. Descartes and the Last Scholastics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Armstrong, S., Gleitman, L., & Gleitman, H. 1983. On what some concepts might not be. Cognition 13: 263–308.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Baltas, A., Gavroglu, K., & Kindi, V. 1997. A physicist who became a historian for philosophical purposes: A discussion between Thomas S. Kuhn and Aristides Baltas, Kostas Gavroglu, and Vassiliki Kindi. Neusis 6: 145–200. Reprinted as: A Discussion with Thomas S. Kuhn. In J. Conant & J. Haugeland (eds.): The Road Since Structure, pp. 253–323. Chicago: University of Chicago Press 2000.Google Scholar

Barker, P. 1990. Copernicus, the orbs and the equant. Synthese 83: 317–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 1998. Kuhn and the sociological revolution. Configurations 6: 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 1999. Copernicus and the critics of Ptolemy. Journal for the History of Astronomy 30: 343–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 2000. The role of religion in the Lutheran response to Copernicus. In Osler, M. J. (ed.): Rethinking the Scientific Revolution, pp. 59–88. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P. 2001. Incommensurability and conceptual change during the Copernican revolution. In Sankey, H. & Hoyningen-Huene, P. (eds.): Incommensurability and Related Matters, pp. 241–273. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Barker, P. 2002. Constructing Copernicus. Perspectives on Science 10: 208–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P., Chen, X., & Andersen, H. 2003. Kuhn on concepts and categorization. In Nickles, T. (ed.): Thomas Kuhn, pp. 212–245. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Barker, P., & Goldstein, B. R. 1994. Distance and velocity in Kepler's astronomy. Annals of Science 51: 59–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barker, P., & Goldstein, B. R. 1998. Realism and instrumentalism in sixteenth century astronomy: A reappraisal. Perspectives on Science 6: 232–258.Google Scholar

Barnes, B. 1974. Scientific Knowledge and Sociological Theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Barnes, B. 1982. Thomas Kuhn and Social Science. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1982. Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition 11: 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1985. Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 11: 629–654.Google ScholarPubMed

Barsalou, L. W. 1987. The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In Neisser, U. (ed.): Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, pp. 101–140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1988. The concept and organization of autobiographical memories. In Neisser, U. & Winograd, E. (eds.): Remembering Reconsidered: Ecological and Traditional Approaches to the Study of Memory, pp. 193–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1989. Intraconcept similarity and its implications for interconcept similarity. In Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A. (eds.): Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, pp. 76–121. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1990. On the indistinguishability of exemplar memory and abstraction in category representation. In Srull, T. & Wyer, R. (eds.): Advances in Social Cognition, Vol. 3, pp. 61–88. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1991. Deriving categories to achieve goals. In Bower, G. H. (ed.): The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory, Vol. 27, pp. 1–64. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1992a. Cognitive Psychology: An Overview for Cognitive Scientists. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1992b. Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In Lehrer, A. & Kittay, E. (eds.): Frames, Fields and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantical and Lexical Organization, pp. 21–74. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1993. Flexibility, structure and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In Collins, A. F., Gathercole, S. E., Conway, M. A., & Morris, P. E. (eds.): Theories of Memory, pp. 31–101. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 577–609.Google ScholarPubMed

Barsalou, L. W., & Billman, D. 1989. Systematicity and semantic ambiguity. In Gorfein, D. (ed.): Resolving Semantic Ambiguity, pp. 146–203. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Hale, C. 1993. Components of conceptual representation: From feature-lists to recursive frames. In Mechelen, I., Hampton, J., Michalski, R., & Theuns, P. (eds.): Categories and Concepts: Theoretical Views and Inductive Data Analysis, pp. 97–144. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Sewell, D. 1984. Constructing Representations of Categories from Different Points of View. Emory Cognition Project Report No. 2. Atlanta: Emory University.Google Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., & Sewell, D. 1985. Contrasting the representation of scripts and categories. Journal of Memory and Language 24: 646–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Barsalou, L. W., Solomon, K., & Wu, L. 1999. Perceptual simulation in conceptual tasks. In Hiraga, M., Sinha, C., & Wilcox, S. (eds.): Cultural, Typological, and Psychological Perspectives in Cognitive Linguistics: The Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the International Cognitive Linguistics Association, Vol. 3, pp. 209–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bartlett, F. C. 1932. Remembering. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bechtel, W. 1988. Philosophy of Mind: An Overview for Cognitive Science. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Bechtel, W., & Abrahamsen, A. 1991. Connectionism and the Mind: An Introduction to Parallel Processing in Networks. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896a. Sur les radiations émises par phosphorescence. Comptes Rendus 122: 420–421.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896b. Sur les radiations invisibles émises par les corps phosphorescents. Comptes Rendus 122: 501–503.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896c. Sur quelques propriétés nouvelles des radiations invisibles émises par divers corps phosphorescents. Comptes Rendus 122: 559–564.Google Scholar

Becquerel, H. 1896d. Sur diverses propriétés des rayons uraniques. Comptes Rendus 123: 855–858.Google Scholar

Biagioli, M. 1990. The anthropology of incommensurability. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 21: 183–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Biagioli, M. 1994. Galileo Courtier. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Black, E. 1977. Manual of Neotropical Birds, Vol. 1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Bloor, D. 1976/1991. Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. 2nd ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991.Google Scholar

Bloor, D. 1983. Wittgenstein: A Social Theory of Knowledge. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bloor, D. 2002. Wittgenstein, Rules and Institutions. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Bohr, N. 1936. Neutron capture and nuclear constitution. Nature 137: 344–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bohr, N., & Wheeler, J. A. 1939. The mechanism of nuclear fission. Physical Review 56: 426–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

di Bono, M. 1995. Copernicus, Amico, Fracastoro and Tusi's device: Observations on the use and transmission of a model. Journal for the History of Astronomy 26: 133–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bourdieu, P. 2001. Science de la science et réflexivité. Paris: Raisons d'agir.Google Scholar

Bower, C., Black, J., & Turner, T. 1979. Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology 11: 177–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boyd, R. 1979. Metaphor and theory change: What is “metaphor” a metaphor for? In Ortony, A. (ed.): Metaphor and Thought, pp. 356–408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brahe, T. 1588. De mundi aetherei recentioribus phaenomenis. Uraniburg:i.a.Google Scholar

Braybrooke, D., & Rosenberg, A. 1972. Getting the war news straight: The actual situation in philosophy of science. American Political Science Review 66: 818–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brewer, W. 2000. Bartlett's concept of the schema and its impact on theories of knowledge representation in contemporary cognitive psychology. In Saito, A. (ed.): Bartlett, Culture and Cognition, pp. 69–89. Hove, England: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Brooks, L. R. 1987. Decentralized control of categorization: The role of prior processing episodes. In Neisser, U. (ed.): Concepts and Conceptual Development: Ecological and Intellectual Factors in Categorization, pp. 141–174. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brown, N. R., Shevell, S. K., & Rips, L. J. 1987. Public memories and their personal context. In Rubin, D. (ed.): Autobiographical Memory, pp. 137–158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Buchwald, J. 1992. Kinds and the wave theory of light. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 23: 39–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cantor, N., Smith, E. E., French, R. D., & Mezzich, J. 1980. Psychiatric diagnosis as prototype organization. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 89: 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carey, S. 1985. Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carey, S. 1991/1999. Knowledge acquisition: Enrichment or conceptual change? In Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (eds.): Concepts: Core Readings, pp. 459–487. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Carr, E. H. 1961. What Is History?London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

Chen, X. 1995. Taxonomic changes and the particle-wave debate in early nineteenth-century Britain. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 26: 251–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, X. 1997. Thomas Kuhn's latest notion of incommensurability. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 28: 257–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, X. 2003. Why did John Herschel fail to understand polarization? The differences between object and event concepts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34: 491–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chen, X., Andersen, H., & Barker, P. 1998. Kuhn's theory of scientific revolutions and cognitive psychology. Philosophical Psychology 11: 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. 1981. Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Sciences 5: 121–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Christianson, J. R. 1999. On Tycho's Island. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Churchland, P. 1989. A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Clark, A. 1993. Associative Engines: Connectionism, Concepts and Representational Change. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Collins, H. M. 1981. What is TRASP? The radical programme as a methodological imperative. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11: 215–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Collins, H. M., & Pinch, T. 1993. The Golem: What Everyone Should Know about Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Conklin, H. C. 1969. Lexicographical treatment of folk taxonomies. In Tyler, S. A. (ed.): Cognitive Anthropology, pp. 41–49. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar

Coulson, S. 2001. Semantic Leaps: Frame Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Covey, S. R. 1990. The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Curd, M., & Cover, J. A. 1998. Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Curie, I., & Joliot, F. 1934. Un nouveau type de radioactivité. Comptes Rendus 198: 254–256.Google Scholar

Curie, M. 1898. Rayons émis par les composés de l'uranium et du thorium. Comptes Rendus 126: 1101–1103.Google Scholar

Curie, P., & Curie, M. 1898. Sur une substance nouvelle radio-active, contenue dans la pechblende. Comptes Rendus 127: 175–178.Google Scholar

Curie, P., Curie, M., & Bémont, G. 1898. Sur une nouvelle substance fortement radio-active, contenue dans la pechblende. Comptes Rendus 127: 1215– 1217.Google Scholar

Darden, L. 1992. Strategies for anomaly resolution. In Giere, R. (ed.): Cognitive Models of Science, pp. 251–273. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XV. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Darden, L. 1998. Exemplars, abstractions, and anomalies: Representation and theory change in Mendelian and molecular genetics. In Wolters, G., Lennox, J. G., & McLaughlin, P. (eds.): Concepts, Theories and Rationality in the Biological Sciences: The Second Pittsburgh-Konstanz Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 137–158. Konstanz/Pittsburgh: Universitätsverlag Konstanz/University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar

Donahue, W. H. 1988. Kepler's fabricated figures: Covering up the mess in the New Astronomy. Journal for the History of Astronomy 19: 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donahue, W. H. 1992. Johannes Kepler – New Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Drake, S. 1990. Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo. New York: Anchor Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Ellsworth, P. 1972. Emotion in the Human Face. Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Erreich, A., & Valian, V. 1979. Children's internal organization of locative categories. Child Development 50: 1070–1077.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Evans, J. 1998. The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Evans, R. J. 1999. In Defense of History. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Feather, N., & Bretcher, E. 1939. Atomic numbers of the so-called transuranic elements. Nature 143: 516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fermi, E. 1934. Possible production of elements of atomic number higher than 92. Nature 133: 898–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fermi, E. 1939. Artificial radioactivity produced by neutron bombardment. Nobel Lecture. Reprinted in E. Fermi, Collected Papers, Vol. 1: Italy 1921–1938, pp. 1037–1043. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar

Flügge, S. 1939. Kann der Energiegehalt der Atomkerne technisch nutzbar gemacht werden. Die Naturwissenschaften 27: 402–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gadow, H. 1892. On the classification of birds. Proceedings of the General Meeting for Scientific Business of the Zoological Society of London 1892, pp. 229–256.Google Scholar

Galilei, Galileo 1610/1989. Sidereus nuncius, or the Sidereal Messenger. Translated with introduction, conclusion, and notes by Albert Van Helden. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Gamow, G. 1929a. Über die Struktur des Atomkerns. Physikalische Zeitschrift 30: 717–720.Google Scholar

Gamow, G. 1929b. Zur Quantentheorie der Atomzertrümmerung. Zeitschrift der Physik 52: 510–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gamow, G. 1931. Constitution of Atomic Nuclei and Radioactivity. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar

Gentner, D. 1988. Metaphor as structure mapping: The relational shift. Child Development 59: 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giere, R. 1988. Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Giere, R. (ed.) 1992. Cognitive Models of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Giere, R., 1994. The cognitive structure of scientific theories. Philosophy of Science 61: 276–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gingerich, O. 1975. “Crisis” versus aesthetic in the Copernican Revolution. In Beer, A. (ed.): Vistas in Astronomy, Vol. 17, pp. 85–94. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar

Gingerich, O. 1993. Erasmus Reinhold and the dissemination of the Copernican theory. In O. Gingerich: The Eye of Heaven. New York: American Institute of Physics.Google Scholar

Goldstein, B. R. 1991. The blasphemy of Alfonso X: History or myth? In Barker, Peter & Ariew, Roger (eds.): Revolution and Continuity: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Early Modern Science, pp. 143–153. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar

Goldstein, B. R., & Barker, P. 1995. The role of Rothmann in the dissolution of the celestial spheres. British Journal for the History of Science 28: 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Goldstone, R. L., Medin, D. L., & Gentner, D. 1991. Relational similarity and the nonindependence of features in similarity judgments. Cognitive Psychology 23: 222–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Golinski, J. 1990. The theory of practice and the practice of theory: Sociological approaches in the history of science. Isis 81: 492–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gooding, D. 1990. Experiment and the Making of Meaning. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gopnick, A., & Meltzoff, A. 1997. Words, Thoughts and Theories. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hacking, I. 1993. Working in a new world: The taxonomic solution. In Horwich, P. (ed.): World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science, pp. 275–310. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Hahn, D. (ed.) 1975. Otto Hahn: Erlebnisse und Erkenntnisse. Düsseldorf: Econ Verlag.Google Scholar

Hahn, O. 1946. Von den natürlichen Umwandlungen des Urans zu seiner künstlichen Zerspaltung, Nobel-Vortrag am 13. Dez. 1946. In O. Hahn: Mein Leben, pp. 247–267. Bruckmann: München 1968.Google Scholar

Hahn, O., & Strassmann, F. 1938. Über die Entstehung von Radiumisotopen aus Uran durch Bestrahlen mit schnellen und verlangsammten Neutronen. Die Naturwissenschaften 26: 755–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Halban, H., Joliot, F., & Kowarski, L. 1939a. Liberation of neutrons in the nuclear explosion of uranium. Nature 143: 70–71.Google Scholar

Halban, H., Joliot, F., & Kowarski, L. 1939b. Number of neutrons liberated in the nuclear fission of uranium. Nature 143: 680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamel, J. 1998. Die astronomische Forschungen in Kassel unter Wilhelm IV. Thun and Frankfurt am Main: Harri Deutsch.Google Scholar

Heider, E. R. 1972. Universals in color naming and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology 93: 10–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Helden, A. 1985. Measuring the Universe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Henry, C. 1896. Augmentation du rendement photographique des rayons Röntgen par le sulfure de zinc phosphorescent. Comptes Rendus 122: 312–314.Google Scholar

Homa, D., & Vosburgh, R. 1976. Category breadth and the abstraction of prototypical information. Journal of Experimental Psychology – Human Learning and Memory 2: 322–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hoyningen-Huene, P. 1993. Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn's Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hoyningen-Huene, P., & Sankey, H. 2001. Incommensurability and Related Matters. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kay, P. 1971. Taxonomy and semantic contrast. Language 447: 866–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Keil, F. 1989. Concepts, Kinds and Cognitive Development. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kendler, T., & Kendler, H. 1970. An ontogeny of optical shift behavior. Child Development 41: 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kepler, J. 1596. Mysterium Cosmographicum. Tübingen: G. Gruppenbachius.Google Scholar

Kepler, J. 1609. Astronomia Nova. Heidelberg: G. Voegelinus. Translated by W. H. Donahue, as: Johannes Kepler: New Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar

Kepler, J. 1618–1622. Epitome Astronomiae Copernicanae. Linz: Plancus, & Frankfurt: Tampachius.Google Scholar

Krafft, F. 1981. Im Schatten der Sensation: Leben und Wirken von Fritz Strassmann. Weinhein: Verlag Chemie.Google Scholar

Kragh, H. 1999. Quantum Generations: A History of Physics in the Twentieth Century. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1957. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1959. The essential tension: Tradition and innovation in scientific research. In Taylor, C. W. & Barron, F. (eds.): Scientific Creativity: Its Recognition and Development, pp. 341–354. New York: John Wiley. Reprinted in Kuhn (1977), pp. 225–259.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1970a. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1970b. Reflections on my critics. In Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, A. (eds.): Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp. 231–278. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1974. Second thoughts on paradigms. In Suppe, F. (ed.): The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 459–482. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Reprinted in Kuhn (1977), pp. 293–319.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1976. Theory-change as structure-change: Comments on the Sneed formalism. Erkenntnis 10: 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1977. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1979. Metaphor in science. In Ortony, A. (ed.): Metaphor and Thought, pp. 533–542. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 196–207.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1983a. Commensurability, comparability, communicability. PSA 1982 2: 669–688.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1983b. Response to commentaries. In PSA 1982 2: 712–716. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 53–57.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1989. Possible worlds in history of science. In Allén, S. (ed.): Possible Worlds in Humanities, Arts and Sciences: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 65, pp. 9–32. Berlin: de Gruyter. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 58–89.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1990. Dubbing and redubbing: The vulnerability of rigid designation. In Savage, C. W. (ed.): Scientific Theories, pp. 298–318. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XIV. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1991. The road since Structure. PSA 1990 2: 3–13.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 1992. The trouble with the historical philosophy of science. Robert and Maureen Rothschild Distinguished Lecture, 19 Nov. 1991. Cambridge, Mass.: Department of the History of Science, Harvard University. Reprinted in Kuhn (2000), pp. 105–120.

Kuhn, T. S. 1993. Afterwords. In Horwich, P. (ed.): World Changes, pp. 311–341. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S. 2000. The Road since Structure. Conant, J. & Haugeland, J. (eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Kuhn, T. S., Shapere, D., Bromberger, S., Suppes, P., Putnam, H., & Achinstein, P. 1974. Discussion. In Suppe, F. (ed.): The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 500–517. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

Lakatos, I. 1978. The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. 1970. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Latour, B. 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Lattis, J. 1994. Between Copernicus and Galileo: Christopher Clavius and the Collapse of Ptolemaic Astronomy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laudan, L. 1977. Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. London: Routledge & Keagan Paul.Google Scholar

Loocke, P. (ed.) 1999. The Nature of Concepts: Evolution, Structure and Representation. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maestlin, M. 1578. Observatio et demonstratio cometae aetherei … anno 1577 et 1588. Tübingen: Gruppenbach.Google Scholar

Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. J., & Thagard, P. 1999. Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Malt, B. C., & Smith, E. E. 1984. Correlated properties in natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23: 250–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Margolis, E., & Laurence, S. (eds.) 1999. Concepts: Core Readings. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Margolis, H. 2002. It Started with Copernicus: How Turning the World Inside Out Led to the Scientific Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

McMillan, E. 1939. Radioactive recoil from uranium activated by neutrons. Physical Review 55: 510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Medin, D. L. 1989. Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist 44: 1469–1481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Medin, D., Altom, M., Edelson, S., & Freko, D. 1982. Correlated symptoms and simulated medical classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 8: 37–50.Google ScholarPubMed

Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. 1978. Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 86: 207–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meitner, L., & Delbrück, M. 1935. Der Aufbau der Atomkerne. Natürliche und künstliche Kernumwandlungen. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Meitner, L., & Frisch, O. 1939. Disintegration of uranium by neutrons: A new type of nuclear reaction. Nature 143: 239–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meitner, L., & Hahn, O. 1936. Neue Umwandlungsprozess bei Bestrahlung des Urans mit Neutronen. Naturwissenschaften 24: 158–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Melanchthon, P. 1549/1846. Initia Doctrinae Physicae. In Bretschneider, C. G. (ed.): Corpus Reformatorum, Vol. 13; pp. 1179–1412. Halis Saxonum: Schwetschke et Filius. Reprint, New York: Johnson Reprint, 1964.Google Scholar

Mervis, C. B., & Pani, J. R. 1980. Acquisition of basic object categories. Cognitive Psychology 12: 496–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mervis, C. B., & Rosch, E. 1981. Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology 32: 89–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minsky, M. 1975. A framework for representing knowledge. In Winston, P. (ed.): The Psychology of Computer Vision, pp. 211–277. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. L. 1985. The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review 92: 289–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Murphy, G., & Medin, D. (1985/1999). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. In Margolis, E. & Laurence, S. (eds.): Concepts: Core Readings, pp. 425–458. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Murphy, G., & Smith, E. 1982. Basic-level superiority in picture categorization. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 21: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1984. Faraday to Einstein: Constructing Meaning in Scientific Theories. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1987. A cognitive-historical approach to meaning in scientific theories. In Nersessian, N. (ed.): The Process of Science, pp. 161–177. Dordrecht, Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1989. Conceptual change in science and in science education. Synthese 80: 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1992a. How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In Giere, R. N. (ed.): Cognitive Models of Science, pp. 3–45. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1992b. In the theoretician's laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. PSA 2: 291–301.

Nersessian, N. J. 1995. Opening the black box: Cognitive science and the history of science. In A. Thackray (ed.): Constructing Knowledge in the History of Science. Osiris 10: 194–214.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1998. Conceptual change. In Bechtel, W. & Graham, G. (eds.): A Companion to Cognitive Science, pp. 155–166. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 1999. Model-based reasoning in conceptual change. In Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. J., & Thagard, P. (eds.): Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery, pp. 5–22. New York: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 2001. Maxwell and “the method of physical analogy”: Model-based reasoning, generic abstraction, and conceptual change. In Malament, D. (ed.): Reading Philosophy of Nature: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science and Mathematics to Honor Howard Stein on his 70th Birthday, pp. 129–166. LaSalle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J. 2003. Kuhn, conceptual change and cognitive science. In Nickles, T. (ed.): Thomas Kuhn, pp. 178–211. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Nersessian, N. J., & Andersen, H. 1998. Conceptual change and incommensurability: A cognitive-historical view. Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 32: 111–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nersessian, N. J., & Magnani, L. 2002. Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, and Values. New York: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Neugebauer, O. 1968. On the planetary theory of Copernicus. Vistas in Astronomy 10: 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Newton, A. 1893. A Dictionary of Birds. London: Adam and Charles Black.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nickles, T. 2003. Normal science: From logic to case-based and model-based reasoning. In Nickles, T. (ed.): Thomas Kuhn, pp. 142–177. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Niewenglowski, G. H. 1896. Sur la propriété qu'ont les radiations émises par les corps phosphorescents, de traverser certains corps opaques à la lumière solaire, et sur les expériences de M. G. le Bon, sur la lumière noire. Comptes Rendus 122: 385–386.Google Scholar

Noddack, I. 1934a. Das Periodische System der Elemente und seine Lücken. Angewandte Chemie 47: 301–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Noddack, I. 1934b. Über das Element 93. Angewandte Chemie 47: 653–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Nye, M.-J. 1980. N-rays: An episode in the history and psychology of science. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 11: 125–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pais, A. 1977. Radioactivity's two early puzzles. Reviews of Modern Physics 49: 925–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pais, A. 1986. Inward Bound: Of Matter and Force in the Physical World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Pedersen, O. 1993. Early Physics and Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Pickering, A. 1984. Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Pinch, T. 1986. Confronting Nature: The Sociology of Solar-Neutrino Detection. Dordrecht, Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poincaré, H. 1896. Les rayons cathodiques et les rayons de Röntgen. Revue générale des Sciences pures et appliquées 7: 52–59.Google Scholar

Putnam, H. 1975. The meaning of “meaning.” In Gundersen, K. (ed.): Language, Mind and Knowledge, pp. 131–193. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. VII. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar

Ragep, F. J. 1993. Nasir al-Din al Tusi's Memoir on Astronomy. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Ray, J. 1678. The Ornithology of Francis Willughby. London: John Martyn.Google Scholar

Reinhold, E. 1542. Theoricae novae planetarum Georgii Purbacchii (sic) Germani ab Erasmo Reinholdo Salveldensi. Inserta item methodica tractio de illuminiatione Lunae. Typus Eclipsis solis futurae Anno 1544. Wittenberg: Luft.Google Scholar

Rey, G. 1985. Concepts and conceptions: A reply to Smith, Medin and Rips. Cognition 19: 297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rheticus, G. J. 1540/1979. Narratio prima. Hugonnard-Roche, H.. (eds. and trans.). Wroclaw: Ossolineum, Studia Copernicana 20.Google Scholar

Rhodes, R. 1986. The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar

Rips, L. J. 1975. Inductive judgements about natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 14: 665–681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Röntgen, W. K. 1896. Eine neue Art von Strahlen. Würzburg: Stahel'schen K. Hof- und Universitätsbuch- und Kunsthandlung.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. 1973a. Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 4: 328–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosch, E. 1973b. On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In Moore, T. E. (ed.): Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language, pp. 111–144. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. 1978. Principles of categorization. In Rosch, E. & Lloyd, B. B. (eds.): Cognition and Categorization, pp. 27–48. Hillsdale, N.J. : Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Rosch, E. 1987. Wittgenstein and categorization research in cognitive psychology. In Chapman, M. & Dixon, R. A. (eds.): Meaning and the Growth of Understanding: Wittgenstein's Significance for Developmental Psychology, pp. 151–166. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. 1975. Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structures of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7: 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rosch, E., Mervis, C., Gray, W., Johnson, D., & Boyes-Braem, P. 1976. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8: 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ross, B., Perkins, S., & Tenpenny, P. 1990. Reminding-based category learning. Cognitive Psychology 22: 460–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rudwick, M. J. S. 1985. The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rutherford, E. 1899. Uranium radiation and the electrical conduction produced by it. Philosophical Magazine 47: 109–163. Reprinted in J. Chadwick (ed.): The Collected Papers of Lord Rutherford of Nelson, pp. 169–215. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1962.Google Scholar

Rutherford, E. 1903. The magnetic and electric deviation of the easily absorbed rays from Radium. Philosophical Magazine 5: 177–187. Reprinted in J. Chadwick (ed.): The Collected Papers of Lord Rutherford of Nelson, pp. 549–557. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1962.Google Scholar

Sankey, H. 1994. The Incommensurability Thesis. Aldershot, England: Avesbury.Google Scholar

Schank, R. C. 1975. Conceptual Information Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar

Schank, R., & Abelson, R. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding. Hillsdale, N.J. : Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Scheffler, I. 1967. Science and Subjectivity. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar

Seaborg, G. 1989. Nuclear fission and transuranic elements – 50 years ago. Journal of Chemical Education 66: 379–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapere, D. 1964. The structure of scientific revolutions. Philosophical Review 73: 383–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapere, D. 1982. Reason, reference, and the quest for knowledge. Philosophy of Science 49: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapere, D. 1989. Evolution and continuity in scientific change. Philosophy of Science 56: 419–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapin, S. 1975. Phrenological knowledge and the social structure of early 19th-century Edinburgh. Annals of Science 32: 219–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapin, S. 1982. History of science and its sociological reconstructions. History of Science 20: 157–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. 1984. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Shepp, B. 1978. From perceived similarity to dimensional structure: A new hypothesis about perspective development. In Rosch, E. & Lloyd, B. (eds.): Cognition and Categorization, pp. 135–167. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar