Measuring Category Intuitiveness in Unconstrained Categorization Tasks

Autor/inn/en	Pothos, Emmanuel M.; Perlman, Amotz; Bailey, Todd M.; Kurtz, Ken; Edwards, Darren J.; Hines, Peter; McDonnell, John V.
Titel	Measuring Category Intuitiveness in Unconstrained Categorization Tasks
Quelle	In: Cognition, 121 (2011) 1, S.83-100 (18 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0010-0277
DOI	10.1016/j.cognition.2011.06.002
Schlagwörter	Classification; Task Analysis; Intuition; Stimuli; Models; Geometric Concepts; Evaluation Methods; Cognitive Processes + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Aufgabenanalyse; Anreizsystem; Analogiemodell; Elementare Geometrie; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess
Abstract	What makes a category seem natural or intuitive? In this paper, an unsupervised categorization task was employed to examine observer agreement concerning the categorization of nine different stimulus sets. The stimulus sets were designed to capture different intuitions about classification structure. The main empirical index of category intuitiveness was the frequency of the preferred classification, for different stimulus sets. With 169 participants, and a within participants design, with some stimulus sets the most frequent classification was produced over 50 times and with others not more than two or three times. The main empirical finding was that cluster tightness was more important in determining category intuitiveness, than cluster separation. The results were considered in relation to the following models of unsupervised categorization: DIVA, the rational model, the simplicity model, SUSTAIN, an Unsupervised version of the Generalized Context Model (UGCM), and a simple geometric model based on similarity. DIVA, the geometric approach, SUSTAIN, and the UGCM provided good, though not perfect, fits. Overall, the present work highlights several theoretical and practical issues regarding unsupervised categorization and reveals weaknesses in some of the corresponding formal models. (Contains 7 tables and 5 figures.) (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Elsevier. 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887-4800. Tel: 877-839-7126; Tel: 407-345-4020; Fax: 407-363-1354; e-mail: usjcs@elsevier.com; Web site: http://www.elsevier.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2017/4/10