Literature DB >> 15875973

Confidence and gradedness in semantic categorization: definitely somewhat artifactual, maybe absolutely natural.

Zachary Estes1.   

Abstract

Artifacts tend to be categorized in a graded (i.e., continuous) manner, whereas natural categorization tends to be absolute (i.e., discrete). This domain-specific categorization is assumed to reflect a domain difference in representation. However, another tenable but untested explanation is that graded categorization arises from uncertainty, which is greater in artifact categories than in natural categories. Confidence ratings were used as an index of certainty in two experiments that tested whether confidence in category judgments can explain the apparent gradedness of those categories. Both experiments revealed that artifact categories were more graded and were judged with greater confidence than were natural categories. Confidence and gradedness were negatively correlated within both domains. Thus, confidence did indeed predict gradedness within the artifact and natural domains but failed to predict the difference in gradedness between those domains. There is more to gradedness than just uncertainty.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15875973     DOI: 10.3758/bf03196734

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


  7 in total

1.  Essentialist to some degree: beliefs about the structure of natural kind categories.

Authors:  Charles W Kalish
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2002-04

2.  Domain differences in absolute judgments of category membership: evidence for an essentialist account of categorization.

Authors:  G Diesendruck; S A Gelman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-06

3.  Domain differences in the structure of artifactual and natural categories.

Authors:  Zachary Estes
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-03

Review 4.  Similarity-based categorization and fuzziness of natural categories.

Authors:  J A Hampton
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1998-01

5.  Category representations and their implications for category structure.

Authors:  R A Barr; L J Caplan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1987-09

6.  Essentialism and graded membership in animal and artifact categories.

Authors:  C W Kalish
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1995-05

7.  Concepts and stereotypes.

Authors:  G Rey
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1983-12
  7 in total
  9 in total

1.  Feature integration in natural language concepts.

Authors:  James A Hampton; Gert Storms; Claire L Simmons; Daniel Heussen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-12

2.  On domain differences in categorization and context variety.

Authors:  Steven Verheyen; Daniel Heussen; Gert Storms
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-10

3.  The generalized polymorphous concept account of graded structure in abstract categories.

Authors:  Steven Verheyen; Loes Stukken; Simon De Deyne; Matthew J Dry; Gert Storms
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-08

4.  Preschool ontology: The role of beliefs about category boundaries in early categorization.

Authors:  Marjorie Rhodes; Susan A Gelman; J Christopher Karuza
Journal:  J Cogn Dev       Date:  2014-01-01

5.  Generic Language Use Reveals Domain Differences in Children's Expectations about Animal and Artifact Categories.

Authors:  Amanda C Brandone; Susan A Gelman
Journal:  Cogn Dev       Date:  2013-01

6.  Metamorphosis: essence, appearance, and behavior in the categorization of natural kinds.

Authors:  James A Hampton; Zachary Estes; Sabrina Simmons
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-10

7.  Five-year-olds' beliefs about the discreteness of category boundaries for animals and artifacts.

Authors:  Marjorie Rhodes; Susan A Gelman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-10

8.  A developmental examination of the conceptual structure of animal, artifact, and human social categories across two cultural contexts.

Authors:  Marjorie Rhodes; Susan A Gelman
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2009-06-13       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Certainty in categorical judgment of size.

Authors:  Eric J Fimbel; René Michaud; Mathieu Martin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-07-10       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.