Feature-sampling and random-walk models of individual-stimulus recognition.

Traditional process models of old-new recognition have not addressed differences in accuracy and response time between individual stimuli. Two new process models of recognition are presented and applied to response time and accuracy data from 3 old-new recognition experiments. The 1st model is derived from a feature-sampling account of the time course of categorization, whereas the 2nd model is a generalization of a random-walk model of categorization. In the experiments, a new technique was used, which yielded reliable individual-stimulus data through repeated presentation of structurally equivalent items. The results from the experiments showed reliable differences in accuracy and response times between stimuli. The random-walk model provided the better account of the results from the 3 experiments. The implications of the results for process models of recognition are discussed.

[1]  William Feller,et al.  An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications , 1967 .

[2]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  On the Dangers of Averaging Across Subjects When Using Multidimensional Scaling or the Similarity-Choice Model , 1994 .

[3]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Modeling Response Times for Two-Choice Decisions , 1998 .

[4]  Eugene Galanter,et al.  Handbook of mathematical psychology: I. , 1963 .

[5]  Koen Lamberts,et al.  The time course of categorization. , 1998 .

[6]  Evan Heit,et al.  Perceptual processes in matching and recognition of complex pictures. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  K. Lamberts.  Information-accumulation theory of speeded categorization. , 2000, Psychological review.

[8]  B. Murdock,et al.  A decision model for accuracy and response latency in recognition memory. , 1987 .

[9]  Robert M. Nosofsky,et al.  An extension of the exemplar-based random-walk model to separable-dimension stimuli , 2003 .

[10]  J T Townsend,et al.  Experimental test of contemporary mathematical models of visual letter recognition. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  W T Maddox,et al.  On the dangers of averaging across observers when comparing decision bound models and generalized context models of categorization , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  David A. Balota,et al.  Bringing Computational Models of Word Naming Down to the Item Level , 1997 .

[13]  R. Siegler.  The perils of averaging data over strategies: An example from children's addition. , 1987 .

[14]  S. Zaki,et al.  Exemplar accounts of blending and distinctiveness effects in perceptual old-new recognition. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[15]  R M Nosofsky,et al.  Comparing exemplar-retrieval and decision-bound models of speeded perceptual classification , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  R Ratcliff,et al.  Continuous versus discrete information processing modeling accumulation of partial information. , 1988, Psychological review.

[17]  E. Heit,et al.  Associative Recognition: a Case of Recall-to-reject Processing , 2022 .

[18]  Thomas J. Palmeri,et al.  An Exemplar-Based Random Walk Model of Speeded Classification , 1997 .

[19]  B. Murdock.  A Theory for the Storage and Retrieval of Item and Associative Information. , 1982 .

[20]  Richard Freeman,et al.  Building object representations from parts: Tests of a stochastic sampling model. , 1999 .

[21]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  An ARC-REM model for accuracy and response time in recognition and recall. , 2001, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition.

[22]  David A. Caulton,et al.  Retrieval dynamics in recognition and list discrimination: Further evidence of separate processes of familiarity and recall , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[23]  R. Nosofsky.  Exemplar-Based Accounts of Relations Between Classification, Recognition, and Typicality , 1988 .

[24]  M. Glanzer,et al.  The regularities of recognition memory. , 1993, Psychological review.

[25]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Effects of similarity and practice on speeded classification response times and accuracies: Further tests of an exemplar-retrieval model , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[26]  R. Nosofsky.  Tests of an exemplar model for relating perceptual classification and recognition memory. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  Bennet B. Murdock,et al.  A distributed memory model for serial-order information. , 1983 .

[28]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Strength theory of decision rules and latency in retrieval from short-term memory , 1969 .

[29]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  A Theory of Memory Retrieval. , 1978 .

[30]  Koen Lamberts,et al.  Categorization under time pressure. , 1995 .

[31]  R. Ratcliff.  A theory of order relations in perceptual matching. , 1981 .

[32]  K. Lamberts.  Feature sampling in categorization and recognition of objects , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[33]  I. J. Myung,et al.  Applying Occam’s razor in modeling cognition: A Bayesian approach , 1997 .

[34]  William K. Estes,et al.  Classification and cognition , 1994 .

[35]  B. Murdock,et al.  Speed-accuracy trade-off and item recognition: a reply to Gronlund and Ratcliff , 1992 .

[36]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Analysis of the Hockley and Murdock decision model , 1991 .

[37]  William Feller,et al.  An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications , 1951 .

[38]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  The accumulator model of two-choice discrimination , 1988 .

[39]  R. Ratcliff.  Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[40]  D. LaBerge.  A recruitment theory of simple behavior , 1962 .

[41]  K Lamberts,et al.  A feature-sampling account of the time course of old-new recognition judgments. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[42]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. , 1999, Psychological review.

[43]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Retrieval processes in recognition and cued recall. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[44]  Tim Curran,et al.  Retrieval dynamics of recognition and frequency judgments: Evidence for separate processes of familiarity and recall. , 1994 .

[45]  T. Zandt,et al.  How to fit a response time distribution , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.