2015
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01531
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Logical-rules and the classification of integral dimensions: individual differences in the processing of arbitrary dimensions

Abstract: A variety of converging operations demonstrate key differences between separable dimensions, which can be analyzed independently, and integral dimensions, which are processed in a non-analytic fashion. A recent investigation of response time distributions, applying a set of logical rule-based models, demonstrated that integral dimensions are pooled into a single coactive processing channel, in contrast to separable dimensions, which are processed in multiple, independent processing channels. This paper examine… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

3
39
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 94 publications
(172 reference statements)
3
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Because this is technically an information-integration task, we expected that participants without experience with morphed face dimensions would approach a novel categorization task using a procedural learning strategy 1 . On the other hand, previous research suggests that extensive categorization training produces a separable-dimension structure in morphed face stimuli (Blunden et al, 2015;Goldstone & Steyvers, 2001;. For this reason, we expected that participants exposed to such extensive categorization training would show performance in transfer tests indicative of rule learning.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Because this is technically an information-integration task, we expected that participants without experience with morphed face dimensions would approach a novel categorization task using a procedural learning strategy 1 . On the other hand, previous research suggests that extensive categorization training produces a separable-dimension structure in morphed face stimuli (Blunden et al, 2015;Goldstone & Steyvers, 2001;. For this reason, we expected that participants exposed to such extensive categorization training would show performance in transfer tests indicative of rule learning.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Morphed face stimuli lack the separable-dimension structure required for learning of unidimensional rules and are instead better described as integral dimensions (Blunden et al, 2015;Goldstone & Steyvers, 2001;, each comprising a variety of shape changes that must be integrated at a pre-decisional stage during categorization (Ashby & Gott, 1988). That is, although participants in the ID-new condition from our previous experiments had to learn a "unidimensional" rule (see Figure 2), the category-relevant and categoryirrelevant dimensions are not initially perceived as separate dimensions that can be selectively attended.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The change from coactive to parallel processing might reflect changes in more automatic processing whereas the change from parallel to serial processing might reflect the use of a more controlled attentional strategy (Shiffrin & Schneider, 1977). These controlled strategies implicate serial processing as an explanation for the role of selective attention in more cognitive tasks such as categorization (Blunden, Wang, Griffiths, & Little, 2015;Fific et al, 2010;Lamberts, 2000;Little, Nosofsky, & Denton, 2011;Little, Nosofsky, Donkin, & Denton, 2013). …”
Section: Decision Processes In Detecting Redundant Targetsmentioning
confidence: 99%