Response-time tests of logical-rule models of categorization.

A recent resurgence in logical-rule theories of categorization has motivated the development of a class of models that predict not only choice probabilities but also categorization response times (RTs; Fifić, Little, & Nosofsky, 2010). The new models combine mental-architecture and random-walk approaches within an integrated framework and predict detailed RT-distribution data at the level of individual participants and individual stimuli. To date, however, tests of the models have been limited to validation tests in which participants were provided with explicit instructions to adopt particular processing strategies for implementing the rules. In the present research, we test conditions in which categories are learned via induction over training exemplars and in which participants are free to adopt whatever classification strategy they choose. In addition, we explore how variations in stimulus formats, involving either spatially separated or overlapping dimensions, influence processing modes in rule-based classification tasks. In conditions involving spatially separated dimensions, strong evidence is obtained for application of logical-rule strategies operating in a serial-self-terminating processing mode. In conditions involving spatially overlapping dimensions, preliminary evidence is obtained that a mixture of serial and parallel processing underlies the application of rule-based classification strategies. The logical-rule models fare considerably better than major extant alternative models in accounting for the categorization RTs.

[1]  L. E. Bourne Knowing and Using Concepts. , 1970 .

[2]  S. Yantis,et al.  An interactive race model of divided attention. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  Richard Schweickert Information, time, and the structure of mental events: a twenty-five-year review , 1993 .

[4]  J. Kruschke,et al.  Rules and exemplars in category learning. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[5]  Jeffrey N Rouder,et al.  A comment on Heathcote, Brown, and Mewhort’s QMLE method for response time distributions , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[6]  Keith E. Stanovich,et al.  Information Processing Models , 1992 .

[7]  S. Sternberg Memory-scanning: mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. , 1969, American scientist.

[8]  William M. Smith,et al.  A Study of Thinking , 1956 .

[9]  David E. Meyer,et al.  Information, Time, and the Structure of Mental Events: A Twenty-Five-Year Review , 1993 .

[10]  J. Townsend,et al.  A theory of interactive parallel processing: new capacity measures and predictions for a response time inequality series. , 2004, Psychological review.

[11]  J. Townsend,et al.  NIH Public Access Author Manuscript , 2006 .

[12]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  Quantile maximum likelihood estimation of response time distributions , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[13]  Fabien Mathy,et al.  Response times seen as decompression times in Boolean concept use , 2008, Psychological research.

[14]  G. Schwarz Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[15]  John Palmer,et al.  Imperfect, Unlimited-Capacity, Parallel Search Yields Large Set-Size Effects , 1995 .

[16]  A. Caramazza,et al.  Classification in well-defined and ill-defined categories: evidence for common processing strategies. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Rules and exemplars in categorization, identification, and recognition. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[18]  W. T. Maddox,et al.  A response time theory of separability and integrality in speeded classification , 1994 .

[19]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Information processing models generating lognormally distributed reaction times , 1993 .

[20]  Yves Lacouture,et al.  Decision-tree models of categorization response times, choice proportions, and typicality judgments. , 2009, Psychological review.

[21]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Information-processing architectures in multidimensional classification: a validation test of the systems factorial technology. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Thomas L. Thornton,et al.  Parallel and serial processes in visual search. , 2007, Psychological review.

[23]  N. Perrin,et al.  Varieties of perceptual independence. , 1986, Psychological review.

[24]  M. Posner,et al.  On the genesis of abstract ideas. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  J. Townsend,et al.  Spatio-temporal properties of elementary perception: an investigation of parallel, serial, and coactive theories , 1995 .

[26]  G. Sperling,et al.  Episodic theory of the dynamics of spatial attention. , 1995 .

[27]  Douglas L. Medin,et al.  Context theory of classification learning. , 1978 .

[28]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[29]  Jacob Feldman,et al.  Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning , 2000, Nature.

[30]  R. Shepard Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. , 1964 .

[31]  J. Busemeyer Decision making under uncertainty: a comparison of simple scalability, fixed-sample, and sequential-sampling models. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

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

[34]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Termination of a visual search with large display size effects. , 2004, Spatial vision.

[35]  Mark K. Johansen,et al.  Exemplar-based accounts of "multiple-system" phenomena in perceptual categorization. , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[37]  Maddox Wt,et al.  Perceptual separability, decisional separability, and the identification-speeded classification relationship. , 1996 .

[38]  J. Townsend,et al.  Stochastic dependencies in parallel and serial models: effects on systems factorial interactions , 1994 .

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

[40]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Converging measures of workload capacity , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[41]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Rule-plus-exception model of classification learning. , 1994, Psychological review.

[42]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

[43]  G. Bower,et al.  Attention in Learning: Theory and Research , 1968 .

[44]  Ashby,et al.  A Stochastic Version of General Recognition Theory. , 2000, Journal of mathematical psychology.

[45]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[46]  J. Townsend Serial vs. Parallel Processing: Sometimes They Look like Tweedledum and Tweedledee but they can (and Should) be Distinguished , 1990 .

[47]  M. Levine A cognitive theory of learning: Research on hypothesis testing. , 1975 .

[48]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  Decision rules in the perception and categorization of multidimensional stimuli. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[49]  T. Trabasso,et al.  Storage and verification stages in processing concepts. , 1971 .

[50]  W T Maddox,et al.  Perceptual separability, decisional separability, and the identification-speeded classification relationship. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[51]  R. Shepard,et al.  Learning and memorization of classifications. , 1961 .

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

[53]  Robert M Nosofsky,et al.  Speeded classification in a probabilistic category structure: contrasting exemplar-retrieval, decision-boundary, and prototype models. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[55]  Daniel R. Little,et al.  Classification response times in probabilistic rule-based category structures: Contrasting exemplar-retrieval and decision-boundary models , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[56]  J. Feldman An algebra of human concept learning , 2006 .

[57]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Response Times: Their Role in Inferring Elementary Mental Organization , 1986 .

[58]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  A Rational Analysis of Rule-Based Concept Learning , 2008, Cogn. Sci..

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

[60]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Uncovering mental processes with factorial experiments , 1984 .

[61]  Daniel R. Little,et al.  Logical-rule models of classification response times: a synthesis of mental-architecture, random-walk, and decision-bound approaches. , 2010, Psychological review.

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

[63]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. , 1997, Psychological review.

[64]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. , 2004, Psychological review.

[65]  Stephen K. Reed,et al.  Pattern recognition and categorization , 1972 .

[66]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. , 1998, Psychological review.

[67]  A. Heathcote,et al.  Reply to Speckman and Rouder: A theoretical basis for QML , 2004 .

[68]  Robert Hooke,et al.  `` Direct Search'' Solution of Numerical and Statistical Problems , 1961, JACM.

[69]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.