Literature DB >> 24203381

Transformation rules in concept learning.

R E Lasky1, K D Kallio.   

Abstract

Two major classes of models have been proposed to explain concept learning: strength models and distance models (Hayes-Roth & Hayes-Roth, 1977). The present study demonstrates that subjects abstract transformation rules as defined by the Franks and Bransford 11971) distance model. Transformation rules characterize how the patterns of a concept differ from each other. Transformation rules are inconsistent with strength models, which assume that subjects abstract component features and not relational information characterizing the differences among patterns. Whether a strength model or a distance model is more appropriate in other instances of concept learning is probably a function of task demands, stimulus characteristics, and subject characteristics.

Year:  1978        PMID: 24203381     DOI: 10.3758/BF03198236

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


  5 in total

1.  An attribute frequency model for the abstraction of prototypes.

Authors:  P G Neumann
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1974-03

2.  Visual prototype formation with discontinuous representation of dimensions of variability.

Authors:  P G Neumann
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1977-03

3.  The abstraction of visual prototypes by children.

Authors:  C J Posnansky; P G Neumann
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  1976-06

4.  Abstraction of visual patterns.

Authors:  J J Franks; J D Bransford
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1971-09

5.  On the genesis of abstract ideas.

Authors:  M I Posner; S W Keele
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1968-07
  5 in total
  1 in total

1.  Feature frequency in concept learning: What is counted?

Authors:  R T Kellogg
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1981-03
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.