Literature DB >> 19426967

The development of category learning strategies: what makes the difference?

Rubi Hammer1, Gil Diesendruck, Daphna Weinshall, Shaul Hochstein.   

Abstract

Category learning can be achieved by identifying common features among category members, distinctive features among non-members, or both. These processes are psychologically and computationally distinct, and may have implications for the acquisition of categories at different hierarchical levels. The present study examines an account of children's difficulty in acquiring categories at the subordinate level grounded on these distinct comparison processes. Adults and children performed category learning tasks in which they were exposed either to pairs of objects from the same novel category or pairs of objects from different categories. The objects were designed so that for each category learning task, two features determined category membership whereas two other features were task irrelevant. In the learning stage participants compared pairs of objects noted to be either from the same category or from different categories. Object pairs were chosen so that the objective amount of information provided to the participants was identical in the two learning conditions. We found that when presented only with object pairs noted to be from the same category, young children (6 < or = YO < or = 9.5) learned the novel categories just as well as older children (10 < or = YO < or = 14) and adults. However, when presented only with object pairs known to be from different categories, unlike older children and adults, young children failed to learn the novel categories. We discuss cognitive and computational factors that may give rise to this comparison bias, as well as its expected outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19426967     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.03.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  21 in total

1.  Effects of vision and haptics on categorizing common objects.

Authors:  Susan Haag
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2010-08-19

2.  Category learning in the context of co-presented items.

Authors:  Janet K Andrews; Kenneth R Livingston; Kenneth J Kurtz
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2010-11-14

3.  Semantic associative relations and conceptual processing.

Authors:  Dina Di Giacomo; Lucia Serenella De Federicis; Manuela Pistelli; Daniela Fiorenzi; Domenico Passafiume
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2011-04-05

4.  Use of evidence in a categorization task: analytic and holistic processing modes.

Authors:  Alberto Greco; Stefania Moretti
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2017-08-14

5.  Organized simultaneous displays facilitate learning of complex natural science categories.

Authors:  Brian J Meagher; Paulo F Carvalho; Robert L Goldstone; Robert M Nosofsky
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-12

6.  The benefits and costs of comparisons in a novel object categorization task: interactions with development.

Authors:  Luc Augier; Jean-Pierre Thibaut
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-12

7.  The Interplay between Feature-Saliency and Feedback Information in Visual Category Learning Tasks.

Authors:  Rubi Hammer; Vladimir Sloutsky; Kalanit Grill-Spector
Journal:  Cogsci       Date:  2012

8.  Set size, individuation, and attention to shape.

Authors:  Lisa Cantrell; Linda B Smith
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2012-11-17

9.  From Perceptual Categories to Concepts: What Develops?

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

10.  Category learning from equivalence constraints.

Authors:  Rubi Hammer; Tomer Hertz; Shaul Hochstein; Daphna Weinshall
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2008-12-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.