Literature DB >> 8007837

Comparing models of rule-based classification learning: a replication and extension of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961).

R M Nosofsky1, M A Gluck, T J Palmeri, S C McKinley, P Glauthier.   

Abstract

We partially replicate and extend Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins's (1961) classic study of task difficulty for learning six fundamental types of rule-based categorization problems. Our main results mirrored those of Shepard et al., with the ordering of task difficulty being the same as in the original study. A much richer data set was collected, however, which enabled the generation of block-by-block learning curves suitable for quantitative fitting. Four current computational models of classification learning were fitted to the learning data: ALCOVE (Kruschke, 1992), the rational model (Anderson, 1991), the configural-cue model (Gluck & Bower, 1988b), and an extended version of the configural-cue model with dimensionalized, adaptive learning rate mechanisms. Although all of the models captured important qualitative aspects of the learning data, ALCOVE provided the best overall quantitative fit. The results suggest the need to incorporate some form of selective attention to dimensions in category-learning models based on stimulus generalization and cue conditioning.

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8007837     DOI: 10.3758/bf03200862

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


  12 in total

1.  Combining exemplar-based category representations and connectionist learning rules.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; J K Kruschke; S C McKinley
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.051

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

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

3.  Base-rate effects in category learning: a comparison of parallel network and memory storage-retrieval models.

Authors:  W K Estes; J A Campbell; N Hatsopoulos; J B Hurwitz
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Learning conceptual rules: III. Processes contributing to rule difficulty.

Authors:  H Salatas; L E Bourne
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1974-05

5.  Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1986-03

6.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science.

Authors:  R N Shepard
Journal:  Science       Date:  1987-09-11       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Comparing decision bound and exemplar models of categorization.

Authors:  W T Maddox; F G Ashby
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1993-01

8.  Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  A model for Pavlovian learning: variations in the effectiveness of conditioned but not of unconditioned stimuli.

Authors:  J M Pearce; G Hall
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Incorporating prior biases in network models of conceptual rule learning.

Authors:  S Choi; M A McDaniel; J R Busemeyer
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1993-07
View more
  45 in total

1.  Exemplar-based accounts of "multiple-system" phenomena in perceptual categorization.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; M K Johansen
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-09

2.  The effects of concurrent task interference on category learning: evidence for multiple category learning systems.

Authors:  E M Waldron; F G Ashby
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-03

3.  Single-system models and interference in category learning: commentary on Waldron and Ashby (2001).

Authors:  Robert M Nosofsky; John K Kruschke
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-03

4.  Extending the ALCOVE model of category learning to featural stimulus domains.

Authors:  Michael D Lee; Daniel J Navarro
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-03

5.  Comparing supervised and unsupervised category learning.

Authors:  Bradley C Love
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-12

6.  Learning categories at different hierarchical levels: a comparison of category learning models.

Authors:  T J Palmeri
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-09

7.  A probabilistic model of eye movements in concept formation.

Authors:  Jonathan D Nelson; Garrison W Cottrell
Journal:  Neurocomputing       Date:  2007-01-02       Impact factor: 5.719

8.  Response times seen as decompression times in Boolean concept use.

Authors:  Joël Bradmetz; Fabien Mathy
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2006-11-09

9.  The divergent autoencoder (DIVA) model of category learning.

Authors:  Kenneth J Kutrz
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-08

10.  Learning to classify integral-dimension stimuli.

Authors:  R M Nosofsky; T J Palmeri
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1996-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.