Comparing Categorization Models

Autor/inn/en	Rouder, Jeffrey N.; Ratcliff, Roger
Titel	Comparing Categorization Models
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133 (2004) 1, S.63-82 (20 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0096-3445
Schlagwörter	Stimuli; Probability; Classification; Models; Comparative Analysis; Psychological Studies + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Anreizsystem; Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung; Wahrscheinlichkeitstheorie; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Analogiemodell
Abstract	Four experiments are presented that competitively test rule- and exemplar-based models of human categorization behavior. Participants classified stimuli that varied on a unidimensional axis into 2 categories. The stimuli did not consistently belong to a category; instead, they were probabilistically assigned. By manipulating these assignment probabilities, it was possible to produce stimuli for which exemplar- and rule-based explanations made qualitatively different predictions. F. G. Ashby and J. T. Townsend's (1986) rule-based general recognition theory provided a better account of the data than R. M. Nosofsky's (1986) exemplar-based generalized context model in conditions in which the to-be-classified stimuli were relatively confusable. However, generalized context model provided a better account when the stimuli were relatively few and distinct. These findings are consistent with multiple process accounts of categorization and demonstrate that stimulus confusion is a determining factor as 10 which process mediates categorization. (Author).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association, 750 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721 (Toll Free); Tel: 202-336-5510; TDD/TTY: 202-336-6123; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: journals@apa.org.
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10