Literature DB >> 17910171

Tracking mouse movement in feature inference: category labels are different from feature labels.

Takashm Yamauchi1, Nicholas Kohn, Na-Yung Yu.   

Abstract

In this article, we examine the role of category labels in inductive inference. Some leading research has suggested that information about category membership works just like any other feature in categorical inductions, whereas other research has proposed that the influence of category membership on induction goes beyond that of other features. To investigate these claims further, we developed an online measure of judgments that is akin to eyetracking. The judgment results and the mouse-tracking data jointly support the view that category labels do affect inductive inferences in a way distinct from that for feature information. When arbitrary labels conveyed category membership information, participants viewed these labels more often and earlier in a trial, in comparison with cases in which the same labels conveyed non-membership information. Our results suggest that category membership information works like a guide for inference. An ecological rationale for this induction strategy is also discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17910171     DOI: 10.3758/bf03193460

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


  25 in total

1.  A relevance theory of induction.

Authors:  Douglas L Medin; John D Coley; Gert Storms; Brett K Hayes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-09

2.  The role of similarity in the development of categorization.

Authors:  Vladimir M. Sloutsky
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 3.  Category use and category learning.

Authors:  Arthur B Markman; Brian H Ross
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 17.737

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

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

5.  Thirty-something categorization results explained: selective attention, eyetracking, and models of category learning.

Authors:  Bob Rehder; Aaron B Hoffman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Conversation and convention: enduring influences on name choice for common objects.

Authors:  Barbara C Malt; Steven A Sloman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-12

Review 7.  The rules versus similarity distinction.

Authors:  Emmanuel M Pothos
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 12.579

8.  Category labels versus feature labels: category labels polarize inferential predictions.

Authors:  Takashi Yamauchi; Na-Yung Yu
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-04

9.  Categories and induction in young children.

Authors:  S A Gelman; E M Markman
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1986-08

10.  Similarity and property effects in inductive reasoning.

Authors:  E Heit; J Rubinstein
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.051

View more
  5 in total

1.  Category labels versus feature labels: category labels polarize inferential predictions.

Authors:  Takashi Yamauchi; Na-Yung Yu
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-04

2.  From Perceptual Categories to Concepts: What Develops?

Authors:  Vladimir M Sloutsky
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2010-09-01

3.  The development of induction based on noun and feature labels.

Authors:  Naomi Sweller; Brett K Hayes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-08

4.  Inductive generalization with familiar categories: developmental changes in children's reliance on perceptual similarity and kind information.

Authors:  Karrie E Godwin; Anna V Fisher
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-07-07

5.  The role of attention in subliminal semantic processing: A mouse tracking study.

Authors:  Kunchen Xiao; Takashi Yamauchi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.