Contextual effects on encoding and recognition of category members subsumed by two levels of classification

Abstract

The influence of contextual variation of category members during encoding on subsequent recognition of a target member was examined. Triads varying in the relative number of members subsumed by two adjacent levels of categorization were encoded . The superordinate level contained categories such as vehicles; members ofthis category were taxi, airplane, and subway. The subordinate level contained categories formed by combining the superordinate level with a common attribute, for example, motor vehicles; members of this category included taxi, bus, and limousine. The member that could be contextualized at either level was designated the target-in this example, taxi. During recognition, distractor triads contained a substitute for the target drawn from either of the above levels. Predictions were confirmed for contextual effects during encoding on subsequent false alarm rates.

Effects of contextual composition of category triads on semantic interrelatedness among members

“…The number of false alarms during the recognition task measured the similarity of a substitute to the target. Low's (1988) findings strongly supported thehypothesis that the extent to which thetarget was semantically related to other category members during recognition varied with the contextual level during encoding. First, with subordinate-level encoding, a subordinate-level substitute LOW for the target resulted in a greater number of false alarms than a superordinate-level substitute.…”

“…Current semantic-features theories of taxonomic classification (Medin & Smith, 1984;Rosch , Mervis, Gray , Johnson, & Boyes-Braem, 1976) provided the basis for predictions of contextual effects in the previous study (Low, 1988) as well as in the present one . According to these theories, members of a subordinate level are more semantically interrelated than members of the superordinate level.…”

“…In a previous experiment (Low, 1988;Low & Roder , 1983), the influence of context on category definition of its members was examined . It was expected that category assignment of any particular category member would vary predictably with the remaining members with which it was grouped.…”

“…According to these theories, members of a subordinate level are more semantically interrelated than members of the superordinate level. It was therefore predicted by Low (1988) that the extent of perceived semantic relatedness between the target and other category members would be determined by contextual variation in the level of triad composition.…”

“…In Low's (1988) study, three major study conditions were defined by the composition of the triads: subordinate level (three members from the subordinate category), superordinate level (three members from the superordinate category), and unrelated total (all members from categories unrelated to each other). Three additional encoding triad types were defmed by varying combinations of members from the above three basic conditions .…”