Does response scaling cause the generalized context model to mimic a prototype model?

Smith and Minda (1998, 2002) argued that the response scaling parameter γ in the exemplar-based generalized context model (GCM) makes the model unnecessarily complex and allows it to mimic the behavior of a prototype model. We evaluated this criticism in two ways. First, we estimated the complexity of the GCM with and without the γ parameter and also compared its complexity to that of a prototype model. Next, we assessed the extent to which the models mimic each other, using two experimental designs (Nosofsky & Zaki, 2002, Experiment 3; Smith & Minda, 1998, Experiment 2), chosen because these designs are thought to differ in the degree to which they can discriminate the models. The results show that γ can increase the complexity of the GCM, but this complexity does not necessarily allow mimicry. Furthermore, if statistical model selection methods such as minimum description length are adopted as the measure of model performance, the models will be highly discriminable, irrespective of design.

[1]  S S Stevens,et al.  On the Theory of Scales of Measurement. , 1946, Science.

[2]  William G. Cochran,et al.  Experimental Designs, 2nd Edition , 1950 .

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

[4]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[5]  W. R. Garner.  The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

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

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

[8]  R. Nosofsky.  Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986 .

[9]  R. Shepard,et al.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. , 1987, Science.

[10]  R. Shepard.  Integrality versus separability of stimulus dimensions: From an early convergence of evidence to a p , 1991 .

[11]  R M Nosofsky,et al.  Similarity-scaling studies of dot-pattern classification and recognition. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[12]  W. T. Maddox,et al.  Relations between prototype, exemplar, and decision bound models of categorization , 1993 .

[13]  Ming Li,et al.  An Introduction to Kolmogorov Complexity and Its Applications , 2019, Texts in Computer Science.

[14]  S C McKinley,et al.  Investigations of exemplar and decision bound models in large, ill-defined category structures. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  F. Ashby,et al.  Categorization as probability density estimation , 1995 .

[16]  M. Schervish.  Theory of Statistics , 1995 .

[17]  Jorma Rissanen,et al.  Fisher information and stochastic complexity , 1996, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[18]  Sylvia Richardson,et al.  Markov Chain Monte Carlo in Practice , 1997 .

[19]  Vijay Balasubramanian,et al.  Statistical Inference, Occam's Razor, and Statistical Mechanics on the Space of Probability Distributions , 1996, Neural Computation.

[20]  J. D. Smith,et al.  Prototypes in the Mist: The Early Epochs of Category Learning , 1998 .

[21]  I. J. Myung,et al.  Counting probability distributions: Differential geometry and model selection , 2000, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

[22]  I. J. Myung,et al.  GUEST EDITORS' INTRODUCTION: Special Issue on Model Selection , 2000 .

[23]  J. D. Smith,et al.  Prototypes in category learning: the effects of category size, category structure, and stimulus complexity. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  Jorma Rissanen,et al.  Strong optimality of the normalized ML models as universal codes and information in data , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[25]  J. D. Smith,et al.  Comparing prototype-based and exemplar-based accounts of category learning and attentional allocation. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[26]  J. D. Smith,et al.  Distinguishing prototype-based and exemplar-based processes in dot-pattern category learning. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[27]  Safa R. Zaki,et al.  Exemplar and prototype models revisited: response strategies, selective attention, and stimulus generalization. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  I. J. Myung,et al.  Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. , 2002, Psychological review.

[29]  Yong Su.  3 Minimum Description Length and Cognitive Modeling , 2003 .

[30]  Safa R. Zaki,et al.  Prototype and exemplar accounts of category learning and attentional allocation: a reassessment. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[31]  Henrik Olsson,et al.  Exemplars, prototypes, and the flexibility of classification models. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  Assessing model mimicry using the parametric bootstrap , 2004 .

[33]  Jay I. Myung,et al.  Assessing the distinguishability of models and the informativeness of data , 2004, Cognitive Psychology.

[34]  Sanjay Jain,et al.  Editors' Introduction , 2005, ALT.

[35]  Jay I. Myung,et al.  Model selection by Normalized Maximum Likelihood , 2006 .

[36]  D. Navarro.  On the interaction between exemplar-based concepts and a response scaling process , 2007 .