The links between experiential learning and 4E cognition

Abstract

In this article, we explore the connections between two distinct approaches: experiential learning (EL) and 4E cognition. EL emphasizes the role of concrete experiences as the building blocks of learning, whereas 4E cognition views cognition as arising from the interactions that an individual has with their physical and social environment. Despite their divergent theoretical frameworks, methodologies, and interests, we argue that both frameworks share a common vision of cognition and that their integration could mutually enhance their respective fields. This article outlines the historical origins and underlying assumptions of both frameworks, highlighting the potential links that can be established between them. Specifically, we explore the significance of embodiment, embeddedness, extended cognition, and enactive processes in learning and cognition. To bridge these frameworks, we propose employing the concept of “concrete experience” as an active engagement of individuals with their physical and social surroundings. By encompassing the essential aspects assigned to concrete experiences in EL, as well as the embodiment, situatedness, extended cognition, and enactive features of 4E cognition, this notion serves as a unifying element. Ultimately, the article suggests that combining the insights from EL and 4E cognition can offer a richer, more holistic understanding of representation.

INTRODUCTION

Experiential learning (EL) is a comprehensive approach that emphasizes learning through concrete experiences, encompassing both skill acquisition and knowledge development. This method applies broadly, from formal educational settings—where students learn academic subjects—to spontaneous real‐world experiences where individuals gain practical skills and insights. Originally rooted in the early 20th‐century work of educational theorists like Dewey, ¹ , ² and later evolving through the 1940s with advances in group training techniques, EL was firmly established as a distinct theoretical approach in educational psychology by the late 20th century, prominently championed by Kolb. ³ , ⁴ , ⁵ , ⁶

4E cognition, in turn, is an umbrella term that encompasses various approaches that share the belief that intelligent behavior cannot be comprehended solely by examining internal brain processes. ⁷ Rather, cognition must be perceived as emerging from and linked to the interactions that an individual's material body engages in with their physical and social environments.

From our standpoint, the links between EL and 4E cognition highlight a shared perspective on the foundational principles guiding learning processes, a connection not widely recognized until now. Many proponents of EL have underscored the critical role of sensorimotor engagement in concrete experiences, aligning closely with the tenets of embodied cognition—a relationship corroborated by numerous studies. ⁸ , ⁹ , ¹⁰ , ¹¹ Additionally, the concept of embeddedness, recognized as essential in learning contexts, ⁶ along with the influence of socio‐cultural factors as emphasized by educational psychologists like Dewey, ¹ Vygotsky, ¹² and Bandura, ¹³ further illustrates the interconnectedness of EL and 4E cognition. This integration extends to the extended cognition approach, where EL posits learning as a hands‐on process deeply reliant on immediate material or social environments ¹⁴ and aligns with enactivism when considering the active nature of learning. ¹⁵

In our opinion, both EL and 4E cognition also contribute significantly to the ongoing debate around the concept of representation, a central theoretical notion in cognitive neuroscience. This notion, often referred to in terms like “neural” or “mental representation,” serves as a cornerstone in understanding how the brain processes and maps sensory information to inform behavior and cognitive function. In this article, we aim to highlight the commonalities between EL and 4E cognition, exploring how these perspectives challenge and enrich traditional models of representation, which often depict the brain as merely receiving and processing information to generate outputs. By examining these connections, we seek to shed light on broader implications for our understanding of cognition, particularly in terms of how representation is conceptualized and operationalized within different theoretical frameworks.

We should clarify that the aim of this article is not to provide a comprehensive review of both frameworks or delve into the various debates within their respective fields. Instead, our review aims to give the general reader foundational insights into each tradition. Our primary objective is to introduce both frameworks and then outline the potential connections between them around the issue of neural or mental representation.

We will first present a short outline of EL and, second, we will describe the different approaches that are usually included under the term 4E cognition. Third, we will address the links that can be established between both frameworks. In the fourth part, we will propose using the notion of concrete experience as a way to bridge both frameworks. We will argue that the way EL understands concrete experience overlaps with what 4E cognition means by an active engagement of an individual with their physical and social environment. Therefore, we suggest that the concept of concrete experience can bridge the gap between the two approaches.

Ultimately, we will conclude by presenting the implications of the issue of representation. By examining how EL and 4E cognition collectively address this concept, we aim to illuminate the nuanced ways in which representations are understood and utilized within these frameworks. Specifically, we will explore how the integration of EL's emphasis on concrete, experiential knowledge and 4E cognition's focus on the embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive aspects of cognition can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the notion of representation. This exploration will not only highlight the complementary nature of these two approaches but also suggest a more integrated perspective.

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

EL is a pedagogical approach that views learning as a continuous cycle of experience, reflection, and application. ¹⁶ , ¹⁷ , ¹⁸ In this model, learners engage in hands‐on experiences, typically with the guidance of an educator and within a structured learning environment. The learner then reflects on these experiences, allowing for the construction of new knowledge and the eventual application of that knowledge in subsequent experiences. This cycle is considered integral to the overall process of learning, as it allows for meaningful engagement with and comprehension of new material. In this sense, EL has been sometimes summarized in the following formula: experience + reflection + new application = learning.

EL was inspired by early 20th‐century thinkers who considered that experience has a central role in human development and learning (e.g., John Dewey, William James, or Mary Parker Follett). Dewey, for example, called for education to be grounded in real experience. Learning for him is a purposeful process based on doing things, on interacting with the environment and with peers. He wrote, “I believe finally, that education must be conceived as a continuing reconstruction of experience; that the process and the goal of education are one and the same thing.” ^{2 ,p.217}

The main theoretical influence of EL has nevertheless been constructivism. Constructivism is an educational theory that suggests that individuals build their own understanding of the world through experiences and interactions rather than receiving it through direct transmission. Constructivism holds that individuals bring their prior knowledge to new learning experiences and that the process of integrating new information with what they already know results in the construction of new knowledge and understanding, rather than acquiring knowledge through direct transmission. Jean Piaget is considered the main figure in constructivism. He focused on the importance of the individual as the center of the knowledge creation and acquisition process and that they create knowledge through the interaction between their experiences and ideas. The other constructivist influence on EL is Vygotsky, who added the social dimension. Vygotsky suggested that through the process of working with others, learners create an environment of shared meanings with peers.

Constructivism changed the focus of the learning process from the teacher to the student, and from knowledge as abstract content independent of the learners to the idea that knowledge is built through interactions with the environment. EL took upon these ideas, but it developed them in different directions. For one thing, EL introduced the notion of concrete experience as the source of the learning process. It also emphasized the importance of embodiment and situatedness in the learning process. ⁶ , ¹⁹ In addition, it formalized the learning process in a stepwise framework, and finally, it produced specific instructional practices that could be implemented in a wide range of domains and contexts.

Historically, the term EL has nevertheless been used both as a construal of a psychological process and an application of a set of pedagogical techniques. Initially, it was employed as a method of pedagogical instruction in the 1940s in social initiatives aimed at resolving intergroup conflicts. Subsequently, in the 1950s and 1960s, it was used in humanistic and business training programs. In the 1970s, EL gained academic recognition and became recognized as a field of study in psychology and the social sciences. This shift from a practice to a theoretical framework was formalized by some authors, like Joplin ²⁰ or Kolb. ⁴ These theoretical developments transformed the concept of EL into a general theory of learning, providing hypotheses about psychological processes and practical techniques for implementation in educational contexts. The success of these developments has contributed to the growth and widespread acceptance of EL as a single theoretical framework for psychologists and social scientists.

Kolb, in particular, has undeniably been the most influential figure in the field of EL. ²¹ Kolb's model ¹⁸ describes learning as a four‐stage EL cycle. First, the cycle begins with the learner's involvement in a specific situation. The learner reflects on this concrete experience from different angles. Then, through reflection, the individual creates generalizations and principles that enable them to draw conclusions and guide further decisions and actions. Thus, in the learning cycle, information is received through concrete experience and abstract conceptualization and subsequently processed through reflective observation and active experimentation. It is worth noting that individuals differ in their preference for the four phases of learning. Their preferences are related to many factors: culture, personality type, life experiences, educational specialization, career choice, and current employment.

Recently, the need to ground some of the core constructs of EL theory, such as the action–reflection cycle, in psychological and neurobiological constructs has prompted attempts to argue for neurobiology as a foundation of EL, ²² suggesting a new biological basis for understanding the EL process. Duch ²³ proposed to introduce the notion of the connectome, arguing that the flow of information in the brain is very relevant for understanding different styles and types of learners.

Other similar approaches

There are alternative approaches that share similar assumptions and, from our perspective, could be incorporated into the connection we aim to establish with 4E cognition. These approaches encompass problem‐, case‐, simulation‐, project‐, inquiry‐, and game‐based learning. While acknowledging their individual nuances, we propose considering them within the broader framework of EL. Thus, for the purpose of this work, we will include them as part of the EL paradigm. Subsequently, we offer a brief summary of each approach.

Problem‐based learning

Problem‐based learning has its roots in the early 1960s, intending to give medical students real‐world problems to solve. ²⁴ This active pedagogy then spread to a multitude of other disciplines, including the field of teacher education or social science (see Ref. 25 for a review). Problem‐based learning has a constructivist basis, incorporating learner‐centered and process‐oriented environments. This pedagogy emphasizes process, collaborative learning, reflection, intrinsic motivation, and assessment ²⁶ , ²⁷ , ²⁸ . In problem‐based learning, problems are ill‐structured, ill‐defined, and confusing and require explanation, new information, or analysis to be solved. Learners use the problem‐solving process through self‐directed research and/or small group work to explore and solve various types of problems. ²⁸

The problem‐based learning process consists of four distinct phases. The first phase involves presenting or identifying the initial problem. In some cases, the teacher decides on the problem, whereas in others, it is the individual student or the entire class. Second, the students develop a plan to solve the problem and work collaboratively to find a way to solve the problem through brainstorming, for instance. The third phase concerns the implementation of the plan, during which students will test their plan to attempt to solve the problem. In the final phase, students must evaluate the implementation by analyzing the results and reflecting on the process. Through this entire process, students not only acquire knowledge but also learn how to conduct research, think critically, and work toward solutions. In addition, they learn to collaborate with others and manage feedback constructively. ²⁹

Case‐based learning

Case‐based learning is defined as a pedagogical approach that enhances the transfer of knowledge and learning concepts and skills to real‐life contexts. ³⁰ , ³¹ This method is based on summaries of real case studies, where both objectives rely on identifying (i) key questions and (ii) appropriate strategies to solve the case in question. The case study often raises a dilemma that requires a good understanding of various scientific concepts, promoting deep learning and thinking skills, such as effective acquisition and application of knowledge. Furthermore, because the process takes place in groups, increased interaction with peers and tutors leads to greater emotional engagement and, thus, greater learning effectiveness. ³⁰ , ³²

Methodologically, case‐based learning relies on peer and self‐evaluation. Peer evaluation can be defined as a form of collaborative and self‐directed learning that stimulates the development of critical thinking, reflection, and self‐awareness. ³³

Consistently, Alt et al. ³⁴ demonstrated, using a structural model, that higher order thinking skills and prior knowledge are the most effective factors for improving knowledge and skills transfer to their work environment. In addition, they also observed a strong link between peer and self‐evaluation and perceived transferability.

Simulation‐based learning

Simulation‐based learning is a form of EL that presents learners with a simulated environment resembling real‐world scenarios. It offers an opportunity for learners to develop and apply their knowledge and skills in a realistic setting. ³⁵ This pedagogical approach is interdisciplinary and is employed across various research fields, spanning from social and computer sciences to engineering and medicine. ³⁶ Simulation‐based learning presents learners with the task of devising strategies and making decisions to address real‐life problems within a simulated context. By receiving feedback on their simulated decisions, learners can directly witness the consequences and reflect upon the benefits and drawbacks of their choices. In essence, a simulation session comprises four key components. ³⁷ The initial component, known as the exposure stage, involves introducing the problem to the learners. Subsequently, the sequence component unfolds, gradually increasing the complexity of the session as it progresses. The feedback stage is characterized by an ongoing exchange of information between the tutor and the trainee, providing valuable guidance and evaluation. Last, the repetition phase plays a crucial role in reinforcing the retention of the knowledge acquired during the session.

Thanks to its realistic and stimulating context, this method helps to increase motivation and retention abilities, thereby promoting the transfer of learning to other contexts. ³⁵ Simulation provides a safe and controlled environment suitable for learner‐centered approaches. ³⁸ Among the available active learning approaches (such as problem‐based, case‐based, or project‐based learning), simulation‐based learning has been shown to be particularly well suited to benefit from ongoing technological innovations and to develop more effective learning tools that involve a high level of student engagement and promote a deeper understanding of disciplinary content. ³⁶

Simulation‐based learning is considered to show better performance than more traditional learning methods ³⁹ , ⁴⁰ , ⁴¹ , ⁴² and better encoding of this knowledge in the long term. ⁴³ However, these studies have several limitations that need to be considered in future research, such as small sample sizes, methodologies that are not sufficiently rigorous or detailed (limiting replication), performance measures that are too subjective (e.g., self‐questionnaires), and variable control conditions from one study to another, making comparisons difficult.

Project‐based learning

Project‐based learning is an active learning approach that emphasizes a specific student outcome: the completion of a project. ⁴⁴ Within the framework of this method, the focus is primarily on the questions and problems affecting students and their communities, approached from an interdisciplinary perspective and through collaborative small group work. This method guides students through several phases: First, they identify a problem; next, they agree on or devise a solution and potential solution path to the problem, determining how to achieve the solution. Then, they design and develop a prototype of the solution. Finally, they refine the solution based on feedback from teachers and peers. The criteria of project‐based learning are thus centrality (the project is the central teaching strategy), driving questions (that push students to encounter the central concepts of a discipline), constructive investigations (involving the transformation and construction of knowledge), autonomy (the project is student‐driven to a significant degree), and realism (incorporates real‐life challenges). ⁴⁵

Thus, learner‐centeredness, emphasis on process and content, collaborative methods, reflection, and assessment are all vital components. Nonetheless, the transferability of content does not emerge as a key aspect of the pedagogy. ⁴⁶

Inquiry‐based learning

Inquiry‐based learning is a question‐driven educational approach that focuses on and frames investigations. This learning process is often associated with the adage “Tell me and I forget, show me and I remember, involve me and I understand.” ⁴⁷ Learners actively discover and construct knowledge through hands‐on exploration and reflection, following closely the steps of the scientific method. Banchi and Bell ⁴⁸ described four different stages of inquiry that can be conducted depending on the student's level: confirmation, which introduces research and problem‐solving skills; structured inquiry, facilitating the discovery of new information; guided inquiry, offering the student more autonomy in their investigations; and finally open inquiry, approaching the expert level of scientific research. As students experience multiple levels of inquiry, they will develop the skills and knowledge needed for scientific inquiry.

In conclusion, inquiry‐based learning emphasizes learner‐centeredness, the process of inquiry, reflection, and self‐assessment as essential elements. Although content knowledge, its transferability, and collaborative methods are valued as benefits of this learning process, they are not considered essential for its successful implementation. ⁴⁶

Game‐based learning

Game‐based learning is an active learning technique that uses games to improve student learning. This approach can be implemented in person or virtually, offering a wide range of applications that foster students’ cognitive skills, such as problem‐solving, critical thinking, logical reasoning, and creativity. ⁴⁹

In 2015, Plass et al. ⁵⁰ proposed that effective game design for facilitating the learning process should combine cognitive, motivational, affective, and socio‐cultural perspectives. This comprehensive approach ensures that games not only engage students but also support their learning outcomes by addressing multiple dimensions of the learning experience. ⁵¹

4E COGNITION

The label of 4E cognition comprises a diverse set of approaches that share the idea that intelligent behavior cannot be understood simply by studying what happens inside the brain. Instead, according to these approaches, cognition must be understood by integrating neural and bodily activities interacting with the environment in some meaningful way and within a particular context. The most prominent schools that are usually associated with 4E cognition include embodied cognition, situated (or embedded) cognition, the extended‐mind thesis, and enactivism, hence the four “e” in 4E cognition. Roth and Jornet ⁵² summarized the central assumptions that they originally attributed to situated cognition, although we believe that they can be extended to all 4E cognition, namely:

• Cognition arises from embodied engagement, highlighting the essential role of bodily features in shaping intelligent behavior and grounding concrete experiences through sensorimotor interactions.

• Cognition arises from, and is connected to, the interactions that the material body of an agent entertains with its physical environment; cognition is situated.

• Cognition arises from, and is connected to, the interactions that an agent entertains with its social environment: cognition is situated in its social context. This context may be immediate, when typical behavior arises in relation to other agents, or mediate, such as when typical behavior arises within larger social contexts (communities, social networks, and society).

• Cognition arises in, and is for the purpose of, action: Cognition is enacted. Relations of reference to the surrounding world and purposes (intentions) characterize human behavior and tool use: in‐order‐to, what‐for, what‐in, and for‐the‐sake‐of‐which.

• Cognition extends beyond the brain, involving interactions with the physical world, underlining the role of the immediate physical environment in cognitive processes.

• Cognition is distributed across material and social settings because of these features. Language use and material practices are relevant categories that capture such features.

• A lot of intelligent behavior does not require explicit internal (mental) representation.

What is important instead is how the world presents itself to the agent.

4E cognition theories have been inspired by different sources, including phenomenology and pragmatism, with Martin Heidegger, Maurice Merleau‐Ponty, John Dewey, and Lev Vygotsky as main references. These authors emphasized the need to introduce the environment, be it physical or social, in the understanding of cognition. However, at the time these authors did not attract much interest from mainstream psychology or neuroscience, which resulted in a long period where the social and physical environment was not taken into account as a fundamental element in the understanding of cognition. Then, at the beginning of the 1990s, these ideas were rediscovered, inspiring a number of researchers to develop different lines of research in which the situated and embodied nature of cognition has been put back at the center of the interest in cognition. ⁷ We will now present an outline of the four main fields of 4E cognition, namely, situated cognition, embodied cognition, the extended‐mind thesis, and enactivism. The distinction among these schools must nevertheless be taken with a pinch of salt. There are no well‐established boundaries that could be used to clearly distinguish them. However, we will include in each section those aspects that might be seen as more characteristic of each one of the approaches.

Situated cognition

Situated cognition asserts that cognitive processes are inherently influenced by their physical and social contexts, requiring that these contexts be considered integral to any accurate characterization of cognition. Context, in situated cognition, includes the physical, ecological, and socio‐cultural environments in which an individual of a species lives. Hence, situated‐cognition studies characterize cognition, including the interactions of individuals with the relevant physical elements of their environment, the relevant ecological features of their situations, as well as interactions with other individuals and social artifacts.

The specific research lines and theories that are usually associated with the term situated cognition comprise ecological psychology, cognitive anthropology, and educational psychology. Ecological psychology has been one of the most important antecedents in situated cognition. ⁵³ This approach argues that intelligence behavior must be viewed as embedded within the ecological context of the individual, establishing the individual–environment interaction as the basic unit of analysis. ⁵⁴ , ⁵⁵ Therefore, it is interesting in how individuals interact with their natural environments, and how they extract information from them to fulfill goal‐directed actions.

One of the most influential ideas that originated in ecological psychology is the notion of affordance. Originally, the notion of affordance referred to a property of an object or of the environment that offers a biological organism the possibility of action; affordance would be a precondition for a motor activity. ⁵⁴ Now some authors conceive affordances as the perceived physical features of an object (e.g., size, shape, texture, and density) and the agent's abilities and requirements in a particular context. ⁵⁶ The perception of an object depends in part on the interactions offered by that object at a given moment. This functional approach is also embedded in our social environment. Indeed, Adams et al. ⁵⁶ considered the response to face perception in terms of behavioral affordances, which can vary significantly within the same individual and across situations. As for cognitive anthropology, during the last decades, there have been important developments that have addressed human cognition in natural and cross‐cultural contexts. Some of the more cited references in these developments are Hutchins, ⁵⁷ , ⁵⁸ Lave, ⁵⁹ Bateson, ⁶⁰ and Ingold. ⁶¹ These authors emphasized the need to understand cognition in natural environments and, at the same time, the importance of identifying the differences that humans show in carrying out similar tasks depending on their socio‐cultural backgrounds. One of the most studied topics in cognitive–anthropological studies is conceptualization, that is, the study of how concepts are acquired and used. These studies have shown, for example, that colors can be conceptualized in different ways according to the culture in which one has grown, ⁶² that navigational abilities are also culturally dependent, ⁶³ or that manual skills, such as tool use, change depending on the place in which they are learned. ⁶⁴

Embodied cognition

Embodied cognition is an approach that emphasizes the importance of the body in constraining intelligent behavior. ⁶⁵ , ⁶⁶ , ⁶⁷ , ⁶⁸ For embodied‐cognition researchers, cognitive processes are not only computational processes carried out by the brain; rather, they should be explained by appealing to the physical features of the particular body that individuals of a species have. Conceptualization has been, as in situated‐cognition studies, one of the most popular topics in embodied‐cognition research. Embodied conceptualization studies have tried to show that the concepts some individuals can acquire and use are strongly dependent on the physical features of their body. Lakoff and Johnson are considered the main inspirations for embodied‐cognition conceptualization research. In Metaphors We Live By, ⁶⁹ they argued that knowledge is grounded on basic concepts that derive from the kinds of bodily interactions that individuals engage with their environment.

Another way of looking at embodied conceptualization comes from what is known as grounded cognition. ⁷⁰ Grounded cognition argues that knowledge is grounded in modal representations that contain the perceptual, motor, and affective features that were active during conceptualization. Grounded cognition has been supported by studies using simulation paradigms, that is, showing the reenactment of perceptual, motor, and other internal states during cognitive processing. The reenactment is considered good evidence that concepts are grounded in the multimodal representations captured during conceptual acquisition. The methods to trigger simulation include classical behavioral paradigms and, more recently, neuroimaging techniques, which have shown that brain areas processing sensorimotor information are active when using conceptual information. ⁷¹ , ⁷²

Finally, embodied effects have also been studied in social cognition. Social psychologists have reported embodiment effects for a long time. ⁷⁰ , ⁷³ Among the most studied processes in embodied social cognition, one can find the influence of facial expressions or body configurations in biasing social–emotional states or behaviors, ⁷⁴ , ⁷⁵ , ⁷⁶ and the way in which moral judgment can be influenced by embodiment features, ⁷⁷ , ⁷⁸ although the reproducibility of the last studies is limited. ⁷⁹

Extended mind

The extended mind thesis argues that cognition is not secluded in the brain, extending itself into the physical world. The core of the thesis is that brain processes and certain elements of the immediate environment form a sort of coupled system when carrying out a task. All the components in such a system play an active causal role, and together they carry out the task. If we remove the external components, the competence declines, just as it would if we removed part of the neural circuits involved in the task. Hence, the set of all the components creates a coupled system in which every one of them counts, whether it is wholly in the head or not.

Clark and Chalmers are the main references to the extended‐mind idea. ⁸⁰ However, there are many antecedents, such as Vygotsky, who already pointed to the fact that external structures, including language, might modulate how we understand our environment, and also more recent developments, such as the notion of “epistemic action.” ⁸¹ For Kirsh and Maglio, epistemic actions are physical external actions that an agent performs to change their own computational state in order to make such brain computations easier, faster, or more reliable.

For a long time, empirical correlates for the extended‐mind thesis were found in many everyday activities, such as the aid of pen and paper to execute arithmetical operations or the use of language to derive arguments. More recently, the thesis has been tested in a research field known as “cognitive offloading.” ⁸² Cognitive offloading comprises studies exploring the use of physical elements to reduce the cognitive demand of tasks. These studies have shown that cognitive offloading improves performance in tasks involving perception, memory, mathematical thinking, and spatial reasoning. Evidence also suggests that humans are efficient in deciding when to offload cognition. Humans seem to manage external resources according to the difficulty of the task and the cost of the resource, increase offloading with increased difficulty of the cognitive task, or decrease offloading if the external resource is costly. Moreover, humans seem to adjust cognitive offloading to different contexts, depending on the conditions and constraints of the task.

Enactivism

In 1992, Varela et al. published a book that had a strong impact on psychology and neuroscience. ⁶⁸ In the book, the authors presented the idea of enactivism as stemming from the observation that there are many ways the world can disclose itself, as they put it, to different organisms, depending on the structure they have and the kind of distinctions they can make. For these authors, cognition must be characterized as a brain‐in‐an‐environment, that is, it must be understood as a relational system serving the autonomous activity of an organism with a specific mode of coupling with its environment.

Probably the most distinctive idea of enactivism is the notion of sense‐making. For enactivists, everything related to an organism's neural system should be understood as part of the nature of a living being as an autonomous and proactive agent. In this sense, living beings are autonomous agents that actively generate and sustain themselves in an environment. Enactivists emphasize the idea that organisms engage with their environment by creating a meaningful interaction with it. Hence, the characterization of the environment arises from the sense it has for the organism. This sense‐making is what most fundamentally distinguishes living beings from mere responsive mechanisms, such as cars or computers. Cognition must therefore be understood as something that organisms bring forth through the active engagement and exploration of their environment.

All in all, for enactivists, living beings are seen as autonomous agents that actively generate and sustain themselves in an environment. This proactive and autonomous sustainment in an environment is what most fundamentally distinguishes living beings from mere responsive mechanisms, such as cars or computers. The features of the engagements that such sustainment involves determine, for each organism and for each environment, its meaning. Meaningfulness implies that we must take into account the state of the individual in the situation and the goals in which it occurs.

Regarding its empirical support, enactivism has remained a fundamentally theoretical enterprise. It consists of a comprehensive theory that aims at understanding human beings from a global perspective, involving evolutionary, ecological, cognitive, psychological, and philosophical components. However, recently there have been some attempts to transform it into an empirical research field (see Ref. 83 for a review).

LINKS BETWEEN EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING AND 4E COGNITION

The subsequent section explores how prior studies can provide support for the connections between EL and each of the four distinct 4E approaches: embodied cognition, situated cognition, extended cognition, and enactivism. From our standpoint, these connections emphasize the shared perspective of EL and 4E cognition concerning the fundamental principles that underpin the processes of learning.

To the best of our knowledge, the connection between both frameworks has not been widely recognized until now. Although we do reference authors from both fields that might hint at overlaps between the two, the purpose of this article is to make these connections explicit and systematic.

Experiential learning and embodied cognition

Many EL authors have emphasized the importance of sensorimotor engagement in concrete experiences, demonstrating the link between EL and embodied cognition. Morris ⁶ summarized previous EL theorists’ ideas on concrete experiences to further illustrate this connection:

Physical contact seems important in the process. ⁸⁴ Jordan et al. ⁸⁵ explain that students are engaged socially, intellectually, and physically, which supports the embodied nature of experiential learning (…) Embodiment is a central consequence of immersing learners physically in the learning space (…) There is surmounting evidence that cognition is, vitally, based on reinstatements of sensing (using the relevant sensory organs), and/or feeling/acting (using the motor/proprioceptive organs) that accompanied the original experience. Thus, when learners are immersed, with their body, in a contextually rich experience, sensorimotor information becomes embodied in memory traces (…) In other words, potentially, to secure deep and meaningful learning the body cannot be decoupled from the mind during the process of learning. ⁶

Motivational and emotional components play an essential role in this learning process. ⁸⁶ As Graham ⁸⁷ argues, “A viable theory of motivation for educational psychology must be able to incorporate emotions.” Deep and meaningful learning indeed involves the integration of cognitive processes, social interactions, and affective dimensions, fostering active engagement and personal relevance in knowledge acquisition. ⁸⁸

Immersive learning can manifest across both physical and digital environments, offering varying levels of immersion. Actional and narrative immersion are fostered through simulations, role‐play, and storytelling, whereas ludic, challenge‐based immersion is elicited through games, exploratory projects, and playful activities. ⁴⁹ , ⁸⁹ For instance, the Proteus effect in avatar‐based interactions shows that virtual representations impact user behaviors and subsequent face‐to‐face interactions, underlining virtual embodiment's role in shaping EL outcomes and social interaction. ⁹⁰

In addition to the direct connections between EL and embodied cognition, embodiment has been examined in multiple studies on learning (see Refs. 8, 9, 10, 11 for reviews). One of the earliest studies on this topic was Cohen's 1981 experiment ⁹¹ introducing self‐ or subject‐performed tasks. This sparked a growing interest in assessing the effects of embodiment on learning, leading to the emergence of “embodied learning” as a dedicated area of study. ⁸ , ¹¹ , ⁹²

The types of embodiment effects that have been mostly studied in learning paradigms are gesturing, full‐body actions, and physical activities (see Ref. 11 for a review). The main strategies of these studies are to semantically relate the gestures and movements to the learning items or to prompt the manipulation of objects. The evidence shows that both gesturing and full‐body actions improve the learning of mathematical concepts, vocabulary acquisition, memory retention/recall as well as linguistic (e.g., reading comprehension) and spatial skills (i.e., attentional advantage) in young children, although there seems to be a facilitation effect also in adults. ⁹ , ⁹³ Moreover, in EL and embodied cognition, episodic memory‐making is crucial as it captures personal and contextual details that enhance learning. These memories differ from semantic memories, which store general knowledge, by allowing learners to recall and reapply specific experiences in new contexts. ⁹⁴ This process is vital for embodied learning, where physical engagement enriches the educational experience, supporting the integration of knowledge in real‐world applications and aligning with the principles of 4E cognition and EL. ⁹⁵ Simulation studies have also been found to improve learning. Finally, there is evidence supporting the role of physically active lessons or active breaks embedded in academic time in improving executive functioning and academic achievement (see Ref. 96 for reviews).

According to a review by Fiorella and Mayer, ⁹⁶ embodiment effects were observed in 36 out of 49 studies on learning, with a median effect size of d = 0.51. However, null or mixed results are also prevalent. The effectiveness of gestures, bodily actions, or physical activity in learning is dependent on various factors, including the learning task's characteristics, the learner's attributes, implementation, and types of movements, and the timing of observing and/or producing movements.

Experiential learning and situated cognition

Embeddedness is acknowledged as a critical feature in learning from the perspective of Morris, summary ⁶ of previous EL theorists’ ideas on concrete experiences, identifying specific indications of the significance of embeddedness in the EL approach: “Knowledge is situated in context: emphasizing place and time. Experiential learning occurs in a specified place ⁹⁷ , in which interactions and contact with people are key ⁹⁸ . Engagement with the place is imperative in modulating participants to think more deeply and critically about the societal norms and power structures that surround them ⁹⁹ , providing a broader life experience ¹⁰⁰ .” ⁶

More generally, educational psychology has been influenced by the idea that context must be characterized as a critical causal element in learning. Dewey, ¹ Vygotsky, ¹² and Bandura ¹³ are the authors who most influenced the sensitivity to socio‐cultural context in educational psychology. Dewey's ideas had a huge influence on making educational psychologists aware of the importance of socio‐cultural contexts in learning. Bandura's social cognitive theory introduced, for example, the centrality of the reciprocal relations between learners and social environmental features.

Lave was influenced by this tradition and stressed the importance of the physical and social context in learning. ⁵⁹ In collaboration with Wenger, they developed the concept of communities of practice, where learning occurs through regular interaction within a group sharing a common interest. ¹⁰¹ Later authors supporting the significance of situatedness emphasized that learning must occur within a physical and social environment, as opposed to a view of learning as an individual effort to acquire information from a source. ⁹⁶ , ¹⁰² , ¹⁰³ , ¹⁰⁴ , ¹⁰⁵ These authors argued that knowledge cannot be separated from the situation in which it is learned and is instead situated within the culture and context of its development. Some authors also suggest that learning is relational in nature, ¹⁰⁶ involving the establishment of connections between elements of the physical and social environment within the learning situation.

The notion of affordance can serve as a bridge between situated cognition and EL. As noted earlier, affordance is a crucial concept in situated cognition and has been studied in learning protocols. In this context, affordance refers to an action possibility offered by the physical and/or social environment, considering the learner's action capabilities. ¹⁰⁷ , ¹⁰⁸ Evidence suggests that infants need to learn the affordances of the environment when they begin to crawl and walk. They learn avoiding affordances (e.g., to avoid visual cliffs ¹⁰⁹ ), fitting affordances (e.g., how to walk through openings of different sizes, ¹¹⁰ object use, ¹¹¹ manipulative and motor skill affordances, ¹¹² visuomotor skills, ¹⁰⁷ technology use, ¹¹³ , ¹¹⁴ , ¹¹⁵ social affordances, ¹¹⁶ and cultural affordances. ¹¹⁷

Research also indicates that affordances are involved in a great variety of learning skills in adults, including fitting affordances, ¹¹⁰ visuomotor affordances, ¹¹⁸ motor skills, ¹¹⁹ object affordances, ¹²⁰ tool use, ¹²¹ technology use, ¹²² linguistic affordances, ¹²³ and psychological affordances. ¹¹⁷

Experiential learning and extended cognition

As mentioned earlier, the 4E notion of extended cognition proposes that cognitive processes are not confined to the brain but rather extend into the physical world and an individual's interactions with it. EL theory authors have long emphasized that learning is a hands‐on process that relies on the immediate material or social environment: “The position taken in this work is similar to that of Bandura ¹⁴ —namely, that personal characteristics, environmental influences, and behavior all operate in reciprocal determination, each factor influencing the others in an interlocking fashion. The concept of reciprocally determined transactions between a person and their learning environment is central to the laboratory‐training method of experiential learning.” ¹⁸

Moreover,

In recent years, the importance of bodily experiences for mental processes has been established both theoretically and empirically, demonstrating that cognition is closely intertwined with the sensorimotor characteristics of human bodies. ¹²⁴ , ¹²⁵ , ¹²⁶ In this view, cognition is instantly coupled with the present environment through bodily activities. If possible, external resources are exploited in order to situate cognitive processes, thereby simplifying mental routines, minimizing errors, and decreasing cognitive load. ¹²⁷

Numerous EL paradigms have explored the impact of the social and material environment. ¹²⁷ , ¹²⁸ For one thing, instructional scaffolding can be seen as one application of extended cognition to educational contexts. This concept is derived from Vygotsky's zone of proximal development, which is a learning zone where a more knowledgeable person's guidance can enhance learning. The term scaffolding was originally used as a metaphor to explain the role that adults can play in joint problem‐solving activities with children, and now it is applied to mean temporary support provided for the completion of a task that learners otherwise might not be able to complete. ¹²⁹ , ¹³⁰ , ¹³¹ The support can be provided in a variety of ways that, for example, include material elements (e.g., a model of an atom) as well as actions (e.g., formulating questions) or bodily configurations (e.g., pointing to the right direction) of individuals who support the learning process.

Language acquisition is a field where instructional scaffolding has been extensively studied and implemented. In language acquisition, social partners facilitate word learning by directing the learner's attention toward the correct new word meaning. ¹³² It is well known that human communication is extensive, and this property is fundamental in the first stages of linguistic learning. Adults use indexical reference in the form of deictic gestures, like pointing to or showing objects, or just shifting eye‐gaze toward them, to allow learners to follow the gaze of interactive partners to identify what they look at.

In the last decades, instructional scaffolding has been applied and studied in other educational contexts. For example, a recent review of scaffolding in health graduate education has identified different types of scaffolding in previous studies: ¹³³ (a) sequencing educational activities; (b) use of material (e.g., checklists) or digital tools (e.g., tutoring software) and (c) teaching strategies. Sequencing is understood as a deliberate structuring of content (e.g., begin with a patient assessment before diagnosing pathologies), tasks (e.g., segregate complex tasks into simpler tasks), or learning environments (e.g., stage‐based simulated environments). Regarding teaching strategies, the review found that scaffolding includes changing roles between teacher and learner during the learning process. The teacher usually begins adopting an active role, later exchanging the active role with the student, and then gradually fading away from the learning process. These scaffolding strategies are also found in other domains, such as in general preschool education, ¹³⁴ general higher education, ¹³⁵ reading interventions, ¹³⁶ socio‐cognitive scaffolding, ¹³⁷ simulation‐based learning, ³⁵ flipped education, ¹³⁸ online learning, ¹³⁹ computer‐based scaffolding, ¹²⁹ , ¹⁴⁰ , ¹⁴¹ game‐based learning, ¹⁴² digital reading practices, ¹⁴³ and even interventions targeting attention‐deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) infants. ¹⁴⁴

Experiential learning and enactivism

Enactivists and EL theorists have acknowledged the association between enactivism and EL since its inception:

Enactivism is a theory explaining the co‐emergence of learner and setting. ⁶⁸ , ¹⁴⁵ [The enactivist] perspective of experiential learning assumes that cognition depends on the kinds of experience that come from having a body with various sensorimotor capacities embedded in a biological, psychological, and cultural context. The first premise is that the systems represented by person and context are inseparable, and the second premise is that change occurs from emerging systems affected by the intentional tinkering of one with the other. ¹⁶

In fact, the enactive perspective of 4E cognition, which suggests that cognitive processes are shaped by meaningful interactions with the environment, aligns with the principles of EL. According to EL, learning occurs when individuals engage in concrete experiences that are meaningfully connected to their environment. ¹⁴⁶

The connection between EL and enactivism becomes more evident when examining the concept of active learning. Active learning refers to instructional methods that involve students as active participants in the learning process, rather than passive recipients of teaching, which was the conventional approach in educational contexts. ¹⁵ Active learning encompasses a diverse range of approaches, including real‐world environments where students assume leadership roles, project‐based learning tasks, simulations, and role‐playing. Other approaches include problem‐based learning and case methods that incorporate inquiry‐based learning strategies, as well as collaborative methods where students work in small teams to accomplish a task. Game‐based learning is particularly relevant in educational contexts, offering an engaging and interactive way to enhance learning outcomes.

Active learning can be viewed as a means of implementing EL strategies, as it fosters direct, embodied, and situated experiences as the foundation of the learning process. Similarly, active learning aligns with enactivist principles, as it regards learners as self‐directed individuals who regulate their embodied and situated interactions with the environment to attain their objectives.

In the last decades, there has been growing evidence supporting the advantages of active learning. In 2014, Freeman et al. ¹⁴⁷ published a widely cited meta‐analysis of 225 studies comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses under traditional lecturing versus active learning. The authors found that student performance on examinations and concept inventories increased by 0.47 SD under active learning. The results indicated that average examination scores were improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Active learning appeared effective across all class sizes, although the greatest effects were in small (n ≤ 50) classes.

In 2022, Kozanitis and Nenciovici ¹⁵ published a meta‐analysis of 104 studies comparing the learning achieved by college students in humanities and social science programs under active instruction versus traditional lecturing. Student performance on assessment scores was found to be higher under active instruction in a proportion similar to the Freeman et al. study. The relative beneficial effect of active instruction was found to be higher for smaller (≤20 students) rather than larger class or group sizes, and for upper level rather than introductory courses. All in all, the evidence seems to be quite strong in support of active learning activities in contrast to more traditional teaching, which enforces the need to take into account enactivist approaches to learning.

THE CONCEPT OF “CONCRETE EXPERIENCE” AS A BRIDGE NOTION

The term “concrete experience” was introduced by Kolb as one of the cornerstones of his EL model:

Learning is thus conceived as a four‐stage cycle (…) Immediate concrete experience is the basis for observation and reflection. (…) Two aspects of this learning model are particularly noteworthy. First is its emphasis on here‐and‐now concrete experience to validate and test abstract concepts. Immediate personal experience is the focal point for learning, giving life, texture, and subjective personal meaning to abstract concepts and at the same time providing a concrete, publicly shared reference point for testing the implications and validity of ideas created during the learning process. ¹⁸

However, even if the model has been widely applied and written about, it is still not clear what a concrete experience amounts to. As Morris put it, “A key issue in interpreting the Kolb model, that remains unresolved, is the issue of interpretation of what is meant, exactly, by a ‘concrete experience.” ⁶

With the term “concrete experience,” Kolb seemed to search for a term that reflects the recognition of a founding source for learning systems, which was originally described in the texts of early 20th‐century authors that inspired EL:

James’ radical empiricism helps us to understand that all modes of the learning cycle are experiences—“If we take conceptual manifolds, or memories, or fancies, they also are in their first intention mere bits of pure experience.” ¹⁴⁸ “Pure” concrete experience is but one special form of experience—moment‐to‐moment, here‐and‐now consciousness: “the immediate flux of life which furnishes the material to our later reflection with its conceptual categories.” Dewey called this “immediate empiricism” and agreed with James on radical empiricism that, “It is in the concrete thing as experienced that all the grounds and clues to its own intellectual and logical rectification are contained.” ^{148 , 18}

We believe that this is a genuine project for EL because all EL models understand learning as grounded in concrete active engagements of learners with their environment. Moreover, we believe that it can be the key to bridging EL with 4E cognition. 4E cognition authors interested in learning and memory have also recognized the need to ground learning in concrete experiences. For example, Kiefer and Trump ¹⁴⁹ write:

Cognition and thinking are critically based on reinstatement of external (perception) and internal states (proprioception, emotion, and introspection) as well as bodily actions that produce simulations of previous experiences. (…) Past events such as incidences associated with our last birthday are stored in episodic memory, the long‐term memory system for events (…). When we recall these events, we reactivate stored sensory–motor experiences collected during the initial learning episode and not only abstract‐symbolic verbal knowledge (…). These reactivations of acquired sensory–motor memory traces are not epiphenomenal but are essential for memory performance.

In our opinion, the notion of concrete experience can be characterized in a way that is aligned with EL models and that, at the same time, shows the specific features that a 4E‐cognition learning model would require. A tentative definition that fits these objectives could be the following: A concrete experience refers to an embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive engagement of an individual with their environment.

Here, we understand engagement as an ongoing action taken by an individual within a given situation, where the individual is actively managing the stakes of the situation rather than just passively receiving information. By embodied engagement, we understand an engagement that must be characterized by appealing to the bodily features that take part in it. As indicated in the section “Other similar approaches”, embodied cognition emphasizes the importance of the body in constraining intelligent behavior. In this sense, the body is seen as a crucial component of a concrete experience because it provides its sensorimotor grounding. ¹⁵⁰ , ¹⁵¹

By embedded engagement, we understand an engagement that must be characterized by focusing on the context in which the engagement takes place. This includes not only the physical environment, but also the social and cultural norms, expectations, and practices that are relevant to the experience. As mentioned in the section “Experiential learning”, situated cognition argues that experiences are not just based on abstract, decontextualized information but are also deeply influenced by the specific social, cultural, and environmental contexts in which they occur. By extended engagement, we understand an engagement that must be characterized by focusing on the ways in which the environment and external resources contribute to the processes involved in the experience. As indicated in the section “Extended mind”, the extended‐mind approach proposes that cognition is a process that is distributed across the individual and their environment, including objects, tools, and other individuals. By focusing on the ways in which external resources and environmental factors contribute to a concrete experience, the extended‐mind feature seeks to provide a more expansive and inclusive view of a concrete experience, one that recognizes the complex interplay between the individual, their environment, and their tools and resources.

By enactive engagement, we understand an engagement that must be characterized by identifying the meaningful aspects that such an engagement brings to the individual. As mentioned in the section “Enactivism”, enactivism holds that this sense‐making is what most fundamentally distinguishes living beings from mere responsive mechanisms, such as cars or computers. For enactivists, the experience must be characterized as a brain‐in‐an‐environment, that is, it must be understood as a relational system serving the autonomous activity of an organism with a specific mode of coupling with its environment. The weight that each particular dimension (i.e., the embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive dimensions) has on a specific concrete experience can vary from case to case. However, although the extended dimension may not always be applicable in certain situations, all other dimensions (embodied, situated, and enactive) are essential for establishing a solid foundation for a concrete learning experience. Even in cases where it may appear that some dimensions are absent, they still play a crucial role in shaping the learning process. For instance, embodiment may not seem essential in certain learning situations, such as when learning an abstract mathematical concept. Nevertheless, grounded‐cognition research indicates that abstract concepts can always be linked back to some sensorimotor grounding. ⁷⁰ In this sense, even if an abstract mathematical concept is learned by reading a text, the cognitive processes involved in such learning will have a sensorimotor grounding.

In the context of concrete experiences, the term “environment” refers to the sum of all external conditions and influences, both physical and digital, that affect the existence or development of an individual. This encompasses local/distal as well as natural/artificial surroundings, built spaces, and material and biological elements present in the background. In addition, in light of recent advancements in technology and cognitive science, it is pertinent to expand our understanding of the “environment” in the definition of concrete experience to encompass digitally constructed realities. Emerging research indicates that the human brain often processes experiences in digital, 3D virtual, and immersive environments with similar cognitive and emotional mechanisms as those engaged in physical environments. This suggests that such virtual experiences can elicit comparable psychological and physiological responses to their real‐world counterparts.

All in all, we propose that this definition can be applicable to both frameworks. From the perspective of 4E cognition, the definition comprises the four fundamental dimensions of the approach: embodiment, embeddedness, extendedness, and enaction.

On the other hand, from the perspective of EL, the definition captures the essential feature of how EL characterizes what takes place in a learning process. Take the enactive dimension. As we have seen above, enactivists emphasize the idea that organisms engage with their environment by creating a meaningful interaction with it. As we have seen above, this is an essential feature in all EL models. For example:

Children develop experiential knowledge by interacting with their surroundings from an early age. They engage in explorative interactions to seek out multisensory input to enrich and support interpretation; the “creation of new meanings happens at the core of these explorative actions” ¹⁵² (…) According to Nordtømme, ¹⁵³ children's sense‐making is situated, emerging through interaction with the materialities and conditions of their surroundings. Thus, children have access to the world through their sensory experiences of their environment, and perception and interaction are inseparable in the process of sense‐making. In this process, their sense‐making emerges from the “meetings” between their past and new experiences. ¹⁴⁶ , ¹⁵⁴

Another feature of how EL understands the learning process is the essential role that context, that is, embeddedness, plays in it. For example: “In experiential education, learners are placed physically, often in collaboration with others, in rich contextual learning environments that represent in the present moment, uncontrived, experience.” ¹⁵⁵

Specifically, we propose that employing the concept of “concrete experience” as a connecting framework between EL and 4E cognition can benefit both frameworks. First, it can aid in clarifying the intended meaning when authors refer to the term “concrete experience” or similar variations of it. Second, it facilitates the transfer of empirical or theoretical support from one approach to the other. If both frameworks adopt this bridging concept, insights regarding the embodied, embedded, extended, and enactive aspects of an individual's engagement with their environment in one tradition can seamlessly apply to the other. Last, any new advancement in either EL or 4E cognition that does not directly pertain to the concept of concrete experience can still indirectly influence how the notion is defined, characterized, or applied.

Clearly, the role of the concrete experience notion differs between the two frameworks. In EL, a concrete experience serves as a trigger for the learning cycle, as described in Kolb's model, which includes additional processes like reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. However, by accepting the bridging concept of concrete experience, one does not necessarily assume any of these processes. All things considered, we suggest that concrete experience can serve as a bridge concept between EL and 4E cognition. Although the role of concrete experience may differ between the two frameworks, its importance in grounding learning in concrete, active engagements with the environment remain a shared focus, allowing the transfer of empirical or theoretical support from one approach to the other.

EL AND 4E COGNITION APPROACHES TO THE NOTION OF REPRESENTATION

A central theoretical notion in neuroscience is the concept of representation, as used in expressions like “neural representation” or “mental representation.” This notion is so critical for cognitive neuroscience that it is impossible to imagine what current neuroscientific theories would look like without it. The concept is central because it corresponds to “what is to be explained,” such as characterizing what a spike train corresponds to, and/or “how we explain it,” by using representations to explain, for instance, how animals navigate efficiently.

Assuming a representational view of brain function constrains the questions one asks experimentally, the design of the experiments, the study variables and constructs, and the interpretation of the results. If a study investigates how a brain processes an individual's navigation through a spatial setting and remembers where things are, a representational approach might consider, for example, that the brain can code for objective features of the environment, such as a Euclidean coordinate map of geographical space. Therefore, it is essential to ensure that brains actually possess and use representations.

The representational theory of mind

The notion of representation generally used in philosophy, psychology, and even neuroscience stems from a general theory about the brain and mind known as the representational theory of mind (RTM). ¹⁵⁶ , ¹⁵⁷ RTM is a philosophical construct synthesizing various historical and philosophical influences, merging ideas from metaphysics, epistemology, and the emerging sciences of psychology and cognitive science. Its origins date back to Aristotle and Plato and have been informed by later developments in modern philosophy, such as those of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, René Descartes, and contemporary philosophers like Jerry Fodor and Zenon Pylyshyn.

RTM encompasses various proposals about the architecture of the brain and mind, but it can be defined by a set of specific assumptions shared by these proposals. According to RTM:

• Mental representations are mental elements that stand for things in the world.

• Mental representations can be described as having a form.

• It is in virtue of this form that mental representations can be processed through specific rules of inference.

• All mental processes can be characterized as inferential processes of mental representations.

Furthermore, RTM applies a computational framework to model mental faculties. Specifically, a particular mental function is modeled by an input, usually understood as a stimulus, that is mapped onto a representation (or a set of representations), which is then mapped onto an output, typically a behavior. In short, a mental function consists of input–output mapping via representational processes. The mind (and the brain) is, therefore, understood as a representational system that processes representations from stimuli to behaviors.

In the context of the RTM, we can understand that a neural (mental) representation corresponds to some neural state that stands for some environmental element.

Moreover, advances in neuroscience have provided insights to RTM authors into how the brain's structuring of information relates to mental representations. ¹⁵⁸ These neural structures are proposed not only to support the brain's ability to organize information but also to facilitate deep learning, highlighting the dynamic and subjective interaction between mental representations and biological mechanisms.

EL and 4E cognition approaches to the notion of representation

The model of neural or mental representation that the traditional representation theory of mind proposes is based on the notion that the brain converts sensory input into representations that stand for external events, which are then processed to produce an output. In contrast, we explore how EL and 4E cognition present alternative views. These frameworks suggest that cognition is not merely representational but also embodied, embedded, enactive, and extended, highlighting an integrated role of neural and bodily activities interacting dynamically with the environment within specific contexts.

Although many scholars aligned with the 4E cognition framework, such as Andy Clark, accept some form of representationalism, there is a growing discourse that challenges this view. Proponents of a more radical embodied cognitive neuroscience argue for a paradigm that considers intelligent behavior as emerging not from internal representations but from the interaction between an organism and its environment. ⁵⁶ , ¹⁵⁹ Our discussion aligns with this transformative perspective, suggesting that the representational nature of cognitive processes might be fundamentally redefined by integrating EL and 4E cognition.

Instead of viewing cognition purely as “representational” in the traditional sense of “standing for,” we advocate for understanding it as “enactive.” ¹⁶⁰ This perspective sees cognitive processes as significant interactions between a living being, driven by motivations and emotions, and its environment, aimed at navigating contextual demands. This view posits that neural or mental states, although not mere mirrors of the world, play crucial roles in facilitating these interactions, tailored to achieving specific, situated objectives. By integrating these views, we suggest that future discussions on cognition can benefit from considering how the principles of EL and 4E cognition could reshape our understanding of mental representation, encouraging a shift toward viewing brain activity as part of a broader cognitive system involving dynamic interplays with the bodily and environmental context.

CONCLUSION

This article has explored the similarities between EL and 4E cognition, highlighting their shared focus on the importance of the physical and social environment in learning and cognition. Despite their different theoretical frameworks, methods, and interests, both frameworks hold a common vision regarding cognition, with EL focusing on improving education and 4E cognition seeking to understand and characterize cognition. We have presented the foundational assumptions and historical origins of both frameworks and shown the connections that can be established between them. These connections highlight the significance of embodiment, embeddedness, extended cognition, and enactive processes in both EL and 4E cognition. Furthermore, we propose the concept of concrete experience as a bridging notion, as it encompasses the notion of active engagement between an individual and their physical and social environment. In conclusion, we have delineated the repercussions of the concept of representation. Through the joint lens of EL and 4E cognition, we have addressed how representations can be reconceptualized within these paradigms. Specifically, we suggest that the synergy between EL and 4E cognition provides a more comprehensive view of the notion of representation.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Angélique Lebert and Óscar Vilarroya contributed to the conception and design of the study, conducted the literature research, wrote the manuscript, and participated in revising it critically for important intellectual content.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

PEER REVIEW

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1111/nyas.15238

Lebert, A. , & Vilarroya, Ó. (2024). The links between experiential learning and 4E cognition. Ann NY Acad Sci., 1541, 37–52. 10.1111/nyas.15238