Subtyping as a knowledge preservation strategy in category learning
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Lewis Bott (1)
Gregory L. Murphy (1) - 刊名：Memory & Cognition
- 出版年：2007
- 出版时间：April 2007
- 年：2007
- 卷：35
- 期：3
- 页码：432-443
- 全文大小：161KB
- 参考文献：1. Chinn, C. A. , &Brewer, W. F. (2001). Models of data: A theory of how people evaluate data. / Cognition & Instruction,19, 323鈥?93. CrossRef
2. Chin-Parker, S. , &Ross, B. H. (2002). The effect of category learning on sensitivity to within-category correlations. / Memory & Cognition,30, 353鈥?62. CrossRef
3. Erickson, M. A. , &Kruschke, J. K. (1998). Rules and exemplars in category learning. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,127, 107鈥?40. CrossRef
4. Hayes, B. K., Foster, K. , &Gadd, N. (2003). Prior knowledge and subtyping effects in children鈥檚 category learning. / Cognition,88, 171鈥?99. CrossRef
5. Heit, E. (1994). Models of the effects of prior knowledge on category learning. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1264鈥?282. CrossRef
6. Heit, E. , &Bott, L. (2000). Knowledge selection in category learning. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), / The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 39, pp. 163鈥?99). San Diego: Academic Press.
7. Heit, E., Briggs, J. , &Bott, L. (2004). Modeling the effects of prior knowledge on learning incongruent features of category members. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 1065鈥?081. CrossRef
8. Hewstone, M. , &Hamberger, J. (2000). Perceived variability and stereotype change. / Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,36, 103鈥?24. CrossRef
9. Hewstone, M., Hassebrauck, M., Wirth, A. , &Waenke, M. (2000). Pattern of disconfirming information and processing instructions as determinants of stereotype change. / British Journal of Social Psychology,39, 399鈥?11. CrossRef
10. Hilton, J. L. , &von Hippel, W. (1996). Stereotypes. / Annual Review of Psychology,47, 237鈥?71. CrossRef
11. Kalish, M. L., Lewandowsky, S. , &Kruschke, J. K. (2004). Population of linear experts: Knowledge partitioning and function learning. / Psychological Review,111, 1072鈥?099. CrossRef
12. Kaplan, A. S. , &Murphy, G. L. (1999). The acquisition of category structure in unsupervised learning. / Memory & Cognition,27, 699鈥?12. CrossRef
13. Kaplan, A. S. , &Murphy, G. L. (2000). Category learning with minimal prior knowledge. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 829鈥?46. CrossRef
14. Keil, F. C. , &Wilson, R. A. (Eds. ) (2000). / Explanation and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Kruschke, J. K. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. / Psychological Review,99, 22鈥?4. CrossRef
16. Kruschke, J. K. (1996). Base rates in category learning. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 3鈥?6. CrossRef
17. Kunda, Z. , &Oleson, K. C. (1995). Maintaining stereotypes in the face of disconfirmation: Constructing grounds for subtyping deviants. / Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,68, 565鈥?79. CrossRef
18. Lewandowsky, S., Kalish, M. , &Ngang, S. K. (2002). Simplified learning in complex situations: Knowledge partitioning in function learning. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,131, 163鈥?93. CrossRef
19. Markman, A. B. , &Ross, B. H. (2003). Category use and category learning. / Psychological Bulletin,129, 592鈥?13. CrossRef
20. Murphy, G. L. , &Allopenna, P. D. (1994). The locus of knowledge effects in concept learning. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 904鈥?19. CrossRef
21. Murphy, G. L. , &Kaplan, A. S. (2000). Feature distribution and background knowledge in category learning. / Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,53A, 962鈥?82. CrossRef
22. Murphy, G. L. , &Wisniewski, E. J. (1989). Feature correlations in conceptual representations. In G. Tiberghien (Ed.), / Advances in cognitive science: Vol. 2. Theory and applications (pp. 23鈥?5). Chichester, U.K.: Ellis Horwood.
23. Nosofsky, R. M., Palmeri, T. J. , &McKinley, S. C. (1994). Ruleplus-exception model of classification learning. / Psychological Review,101, 53鈥?9. CrossRef
24. Rehder, B. , &Murphy, G. L. (2003). A knowledge-resonance (KRES) model of category learning. / Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 759鈥?84. CrossRef
25. Rozenblit, L. , &Keil, F. [C.] (2002). The misunderstood limits of folk science: An illusion of explanatory depth. / Cognitive Science,26, 521鈥?62. CrossRef
26. Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L. , & the PDP Research Group (1986). / Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. Smith, J. D. , &Minda, J. P. (1998). Prototypes in the mist: The early epochs of category learning. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 1411鈥?436. CrossRef
28. Stephan, W. G. (1985). Intergroup relations. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), / Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 599鈥?58). New York: Random House.
29. Yang, L.-X. , &Lewandowsky, S. (2003). Context-gated knowledge partitioning in categorization. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,29, 663鈥?79. CrossRef
30. Yang, L.-X. , &Lewandowsky, S. (2004). Knowledge partitioning in categorization: Constraints on exemplar models. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 1045鈥?064. CrossRef - 作者单位：Lewis Bott (1)
Gregory L. Murphy (1)
1. New York University, New York, New York
文摘
Subtyping occurs when atypical examples are excluded from consideration in judging a category. In three experiments, we investigated whether subtyping can influence category learning. In each experiment, participants learned about a category where most, but not all, of the exemplars corresponded to a theme. The category structure included asubtyping dimension, which had one value for theme-congruent exemplars and another for exception exemplars. On the basis of work by Hayes, Foster, and Gadd (2003) and studies on social stereotyping, we hypothesized that this subtyping dimension would enable the participants to discount the exception exemplars, thereby facilitating category learning. Contrary to expectations, we did not find a subtyping effect with traditional category-learning procedures. By introducing the theme prior to learning, however, we observed increased effects on typicality ratings (Experiment 1) and facilitated learning of the category (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 provided direct evidence that introducing the theme prior to learning enhanced the subtyping effect and provided support for a knowledge-gating explanation of subtyping. We conclude that subtyping effects are strongest on already-learned concepts and that subtyping is unlikely to aid in the learning of new concepts, except in particular circumstances.