Literature DB >> 12198789

Learning categories at different hierarchical levels: a comparison of category learning models.

T J Palmeri1.   

Abstract

Three formal models of category learning, the rational model (Anderson, 1990), the configural-cue model (Gluck & Bower, 1988a), and ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992), were evaluated on their ability to account for differential learning of hierarchically structured categories. An experiment using a theoretically challenging category structure developed by Lassaline, Wisniewski, and Medin (1992) is reported. Subjects learned one of two different category structures. For one structure, diagnostic information was present along a single dimension (1-D). For the other structure, diagnostic information was distributed across four dimensions (4-D). Subjects learned these categories at a general or at a specific level of abstraction. For the 1-D structure, specific-level categories were learned more rapidly than general-level categories. For the 4-D structure, the opposite result was observed. These results proved highly diagnostic for evaluating the models--although ALCOVE provided a good account of the observed results, the rational model and the configural-cue model did not.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 12198789     DOI: 10.3758/bf03210840

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  15 in total

1.  Combining exemplar-based category representations and connectionist learning rules.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; J K Kruschke; S C McKinley
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  ALCOVE: an exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning.

Authors:  J K Kruschke
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 3.  Human learning and memory: connections and dissociations.

Authors:  D L Hintzman
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 24.137

4.  Learning to classify integral-dimension stimuli.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; T J Palmeri
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-06

5.  Parts in object concepts: experiments with artificial categories.

Authors:  G L Murphy
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1991-09

6.  Exemplar similarity and the development of automaticity.

Authors:  T J Palmeri
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; T J Palmeri
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1986-03

9.  Comparing decision bound and exemplar models of categorization.

Authors:  W T Maddox; F G Ashby
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1993-01

10.  Rule-plus-exception model of classification learning.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; T J Palmeri; S C McKinley
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  10 in total

1.  The divergent autoencoder (DIVA) model of category learning.

Authors:  Kenneth J Kutrz
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-08

2.  The dynamics of categorization: Unraveling rapid categorization.

Authors:  Michael L Mack; Thomas J Palmeri
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2015-05-04

3.  Fragment-based learning of visual object categories.

Authors:  Jay Hegdé; Evgeniy Bart; Daniel Kersten
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2008-04-22       Impact factor: 10.834

Review 4.  Is there an exemplar theory of concepts?

Authors:  Gregory L Murphy
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-08

5.  Rule-based extrapolation in perceptual categorization.

Authors:  Michael A Erickson; John K Kruschke
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-03

6.  Revealing a competitive dynamic in rapid categorization with object substitution masking.

Authors:  Jason K Chow; Thomas J Palmeri; Michael L Mack
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Fragment-based learning of visual object categories in non-human primates.

Authors:  Sarah Kromrey; Matthew Maestri; Karin Hauffen; Evgeniy Bart; Jay Hegdé
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The timing of visual object categorization.

Authors:  Michael L Mack; Thomas J Palmeri
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-07-15

9.  Comparing methods of category learning: Classification versus feature inference.

Authors:  Emma L Morgan; Mark K Johansen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-07

10.  Learning hierarchically organized science categories: simultaneous instruction at the high and subtype levels.

Authors:  Robert M Nosofsky; Colin Slaughter; Mark A McDaniel
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2019-12-19
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.