Literature DB >> 12450096

Comparisons between exemplar similarity and mixed prototype models using a linearly separable category structure.

Roger D Stanton1, Robert M Nosofsky, Safa R Zaki.   

Abstract

Nosofsky and Zaki (2002) found that an exemplar similarity model provided better accounts of individual subject classification and generalization performance than did a mixed prototype model proposed by Smith and Minda (1998; Minda & Smith, 2001). However, these previous tests used a nonlinearly separable category structure. In the present work, the authors extend the previous findings by demonstrating a superiority for the exemplar generalization model over the mixed prototype model in a case involving a linearly separable structure. Because this structure has numerous features that Minda and Smith argued should be conducive to prototype-based processing, the results pose a significant challenge to the mixed prototype view.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12450096     DOI: 10.3758/bf03195778

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  17 in total

Review 1.  Thirty categorization results in search of a model.

Authors:  J D Smith; J P Minda
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Exemplar representation without generalization? Comment on Smith and Minda's (2000) "Thirty categorization results in search of a model".

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Exemplar-based accounts of "multiple-system" phenomena in perceptual categorization.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; M K Johansen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

4.  Exemplar and prototype models revisited: response strategies, selective attention, and stimulus generalization.

Authors:  Robert M Nosofsky; Safa R Zaki
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Tests of an exemplar model for relating perceptual classification and recognition memory.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Array models for category learning.

Authors:  W K Estes
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science.

Authors:  R N Shepard
Journal:  Science       Date:  1987-09-11       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  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

10.  Given versus induced category representations: use of prototype and exemplar information in classification.

Authors:  D L Medin; M W Altom; T D Murphy
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 3.051

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.