TY - JOUR
T1 - Category learning from equivalence constraints
AU - Hammer, Rubi
AU - Hertz, Tomer
AU - Hochstein, Shaul
AU - Weinshall, Daphna
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgments This study was supported by a ‘‘Center of Excellence’’ grant from the Israel Science Foundation, a grant from the US-Israel Binational Science Foundation, and a grant by the EU under the DIRAC integrated project IST-027787. Preliminary results of this study were presented in the annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Stresa, Italy, July 2005. We would like to thank Lee Brooks and Gil Diesendruck for their comments. We also thank Michael Ziessler and an anonymous reviewer for their useful comments.
PY - 2009/8/1
Y1 - 2009/8/1
N2 - Information for category learning may be provided as positive or negative equivalence constraints (PEC/NEC)-indicating that some exemplars belong to the same or different categories. To investigate categorization strategies, we studied category learning from each type of constraint separately, using a simple rule-based task. We found that participants use PECs differently than NECs, even when these provide the same amount of information. With informative PECs, categorization was rapid, reasonably accurate and uniform across participants. With informative NECs, performance was rapid and highly accurate for only some participants. When given directions, all participants reached high-performance levels with NECs, but the use of PECs remained unchanged. These results suggest that people may use PECs intuitively, but not perfectly. In contrast, using informative NECs enables a potentially more accurate categorization strategy, but a less natural, one which many participants initially fail to implement-even in this simplified setting.
AB - Information for category learning may be provided as positive or negative equivalence constraints (PEC/NEC)-indicating that some exemplars belong to the same or different categories. To investigate categorization strategies, we studied category learning from each type of constraint separately, using a simple rule-based task. We found that participants use PECs differently than NECs, even when these provide the same amount of information. With informative PECs, categorization was rapid, reasonably accurate and uniform across participants. With informative NECs, performance was rapid and highly accurate for only some participants. When given directions, all participants reached high-performance levels with NECs, but the use of PECs remained unchanged. These results suggest that people may use PECs intuitively, but not perfectly. In contrast, using informative NECs enables a potentially more accurate categorization strategy, but a less natural, one which many participants initially fail to implement-even in this simplified setting.
KW - Categorization
KW - Category learning
KW - Concept acquisition
KW - Dimension weighting
KW - Learning to learn
KW - Perceived similarity
KW - Rule-based
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=68549122979&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10339-008-0243-x
DO - 10.1007/s10339-008-0243-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 19050949
AN - SCOPUS:68549122979
SN - 1612-4782
VL - 10
SP - 211
EP - 232
JO - Cognitive Processing
JF - Cognitive Processing
IS - 3
ER -