Human Learning of Elemental Category Structures: Revising the Classic Result of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961)

Autor/inn/en	Kurtz, Kenneth J.; Levering, Kimery R.; Stanton, Roger D.; Romero, Joshua; Morris, Steven N.
Titel	Human Learning of Elemental Category Structures: Revising the Classic Result of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961)
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39 (2013) 2, S.552-572 (21 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0278-7393
DOI	10.1037/a0029178
Schlagwörter	Stimuli; Program Evaluation; Stimulus Generalization; Experiments; Experimental Psychology; College Students; Statistical Analysis; Attention; Classification; Maryland; New York + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Anreizsystem; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Erprobung; Experimentelle Psychologie; Collegestudent; Statistische Analyse; Aufmerksamkeit; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem
Abstract	The findings of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) on the relative ease of learning 6 elemental types of 2-way classifications have been deeply influential 2 times over: 1st, as a rebuke to pure stimulus generalization accounts, and again as the leading benchmark for evaluating formal models of human category learning. The litmus test for models is the ability to simulate an observed advantage in learning a category structure based on an exclusive-or (XOR) rule over 2 relevant dimensions (Type II) relative to category structures that have no perfectly predictive cue or cue combination (including the linearly-separable Type IV). However, a review of the literature reveals that a Type II advantage over Type IV is found only under highly specific experimental conditions. We investigate when and why a Type II advantage exists to determine the appropriate benchmark for models and the psychological theories they represent. A series of 8 experiments link particular conditions of learning to outcomes ranging from a traditional Type II advantage to compelling non-differences and reversals (i.e., Type IV advantage). Common interpretations of the Type II advantage as either a broad-based phenomenon of human learning or as strong evidence for an attention-mediated similarity-based account are called into question by our findings. Finally, a role for verbalization in the category learning process is supported. (Contains 3 tables, 8 figures and 2 footnotes.) (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10