Is overall similarity classification less effortful than single-dimension classification?

It is sometimes argued that the implementation of an overall similarity classification is less effortful than the implementation of a single-dimension classification. In the current article, we argue that the evidence securely in support of this view is limited, and report additional evidence in support of the opposite proposition--overall similarity classification is more effortful than single-dimension classification. Using a match-to-standards procedure, Experiments 1A, 1B and 2 demonstrate that concurrent load reduces the prevalence of overall similarity classification, and that this effect is robust to changes in the concurrent load task employed, the level of time pressure experienced, and the short-term memory requirements of the classification task. Experiment 3 demonstrates that participants who produced overall similarity classifications from the outset have larger working memory capacities than those who produced single-dimension classifications initially, and Experiment 4 demonstrates that instructions to respond meticulously increase the prevalence of overall similarity classification.