Using Ideal Observers in Higher-order Human Category Learning

Ideal observer models have proven useful in investigating assumptions about human information processing in a variety of perceptual tasks. However, these models have not been applied in the area of higher-order category learning. We describe a simple Bayesian ideal observer and apply it to empirical data on category learning. We describe an experiment in which we found that acquisition of family resemblance categories was drastically impaired if the categories were defined by relations between features rather than by the features themselves. An ideal observer was used to test whether this effect could be accounted for by inherent information differences between the conditions. A comparison of participants’ performance to the model found a significant difference in efficiency of learning even after accounting for information differences between conditions. This analysis illustrates how ideal observer methods can provide useful tools for analyzing higher-order category learning.

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

[2]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Discovering Latent Classes in Relational Data , 2004 .

[3]  D. Gentner,et al.  Respects for similarity , 1993 .

[4]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  SEQL: Category learning as progressive abstraction using structure mapping , 2000 .

[5]  David C. Knill,et al.  Object classification for human and ideal observers , 1995, Vision Research.

[6]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Ad hoc categories , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[7]  G. Legge,et al.  Mr. Chips: An ideal-observer model of reading , 1997 .

[8]  Alexander J. Smola,et al.  Learning with kernels , 1998 .

[9]  John H. Holland,et al.  Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[10]  B. Ross,et al.  Abstract coherent categories. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[11]  G. Murphy,et al.  The Big Book of Concepts , 2002 .

[12]  Pedro M. Domingos,et al.  On the Optimality of the Simple Bayesian Classifier under Zero-One Loss , 1997, Machine Learning.

[13]  K. Holyoak,et al.  A symbolic-connectionist theory of relational inference and generalization. , 2003, Psychological review.

[14]  F. Ashby,et al.  On the nature of implicit categorization , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[15]  L. Chalupa,et al.  The visual neurosciences , 2004 .

[16]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Similarity Involving Attributes and Relations: Judgments of Similarity and Difference Are Not Inverses , 1990 .

[17]  Bob Rehder,et al.  Category coherence and category-based property induction , 2004, Cognition.

[18]  Corey J Bohil,et al.  Observational versus feedback training in rule-based and information-integration category learning , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[19]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought , 1994 .

[20]  F. Keil Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development , 1989 .

[21]  D. Medin,et al.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence. , 1985, Psychological review.

[22]  E. Rosch,et al.  Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  L. Wittgenstein Philosophical investigations = Philosophische Untersuchungen , 1958 .

[24]  E. Rosch,et al.  Structural bases of typicality effects. , 1976 .

[25]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Adaptive Nature of Human Categorization. , 1991 .

[26]  B. Ross,et al.  Concepts and Categories , 1994 .

[27]  Gordon E Legge,et al.  Lost in virtual space: studies in human and ideal spatial navigation. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  D. Gentner Structure‐Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy* , 1983 .

[29]  L. Rips Similarity, typicality, and categorization , 1989 .

[30]  W. Geisler Ideal Observer Analysis , 2002 .