T. T. Rogers and K. Patterson (2007), in their article “Object Categorization: Reversals and Explanations of the Basic-Level Advantage” (Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 451–469), reported an impressive set of results demonstrating a reversal of the highly robust basic-level advantage both in patients with semantic dementia and in healthy individuals engaged in a speeded categorization task. To explain their results, as well as the usual basic-level advantage seen in healthy individuals, the authors employed a parallel distributed processing theory of conceptual knowledge. In this paper, we introduce an alternative way of explaining the results of Rogers and Patterson, which is premised on a more restricted set of assumptions born from standard categorization theory. Specifically, we provide evidence that their results can be accounted for based on the predictions of the simplicity model of unsupervised categorization.
AndersonJ.R. (1991). The adaptive nature of human categorization.Psychological Review, 98, 409–426doi:10.1037/0033-295X.98.3.409.
2.
AshbyF.G.Alfonso-ReeseL.A.TurkenA.U.WaldronE.M. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning.Psychological Review, 105, 442–481.
3.
AshbyF.G.MaddoxW.T. (2005). Human category learning.Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149–178doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070217.
4.
BarsalouL.W.SimmonsW.K.BarbeyA.WilsonC.D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 84–91doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00029-3.
5.
BerryC.J.ShanksD.R.HensonR.N. A. (2008). A single-system account of the relationship between priming, recognition, and fluency.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 34, 97–111doi:10.1037/0178-7393.34.1.97.
6.
ChaterN. (1996). Reconciling simplicity and likelihood principles in perceptual organization.Psychological Review, 103, 566–581.
7.
ChaterN. (1999). The search for simplicity: A fundamental cognitive principle?.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 273–302doi:10.1080/027249899391070.
8.
CollinsA.M.LoftusE.F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing.Psychological Review, 82, 407–428.
9.
Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time for semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 240–247. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371.
FeldmanJ. (2000). Minimization of Boolean complexity in human concept learning.Nature, 407, 630–633doi:10.1038/35036586.
12.
FodorJ.A. (1983). The modularity of mind, MIT PressCambridge, MA.
13.
GarrardP.HodgesJ.R. (2000). Semantic dementia: Clinical, radiological, and pathological perspectives.Journal of Neurology, 247, 409–422doi:10.1007/s004150070169.
14.
GosselinF.SchynsP.G. (2001). Why do we SLIP to the basic level? Computational constraints and their implementation.Psychological Review, 108, 735–758doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.735.
15.
HeitE.Knowledge and concept learning.Knowledge, concepts, and categories, LambertsK.ShanksD. (1997). Psychology PressLondon, UK7–41.
16.
HodgesJ.R.GrahamN.PattersonK. (1995). Charting the progression in semantic dementia: Implications for the organization of semantic memory.Memory, 3, 463–495.
17.
HoffmannJ.ZiesslerC. (1983). Objectidentifikation in kunstlichen begriffshierarchien [Object identification in artificial concept hierarchies].Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 194, 135–167.
18.
JolicoeurP.GluckM.KosslynS.M. (1984). Pictures and names: Making the connection.Cognitive Psychology, 16, 243–275doi:10.1016/0010-0285(84)90009-4.
KelloC. (2004). Control over the time-course of cognition in the tempo-naming task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 942–955doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.5.942.
21.
KomatsuL.K. (1992). Recent views of conceptual structure.Psychological Bulletin, 112, 500–526doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.500.
22.
LambertsK. (1995). Categorization under time pressure.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 161–180doi:10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.161.
23.
LambertsK. (1998). The time course of categorization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 24, 695–711doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.3.695.
24.
LambertsK. (2000). Information accumulation theory of categorization response times.Psychological Review, 107, 227–260doi:10.1037/TO33-295X.107.2.227.
25.
LambertsK. (2002). Feature sampling in categorization and recognition of objects.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 141–154doi:10.1080/02724980143000208.
26.
LambertsK.FreemanR.P. J. (1999). Building object representations from parts: Tests of a stochastic sampling model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 904–926doi:10.1037/0096-1523.25.4.904.
LoveB.C.MedinD.L.GureckisT.M. (2004). SUSTAIN: A network model of category learning.Psychological Review, 111, 309–332doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.309.
29.
MalmbergK.J.ZeelenbergR.ShiffrinR.M. (2004). Turning up the noise or turning down the volume? On the nature of the impairment of episodic recognition memory by midazolam.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 30, 540–549doi:10.1037/0278-7393.30.2.540.
30.
MaltB.C. (1995). Category coherence in cross-cultural perspective.Cognitive Psychology, 29, 85–148doi:10.1006/cogp.1995.1013.
31.
MarrD. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information, W. H. FreemanSan Francisco, CA.
MedinD.L. (1986). Commentary on “Memory storage and retrieval processes in category learning”.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 373–381doi:10.1037/0096-3445.115.4.373.
34.
MiltonF.LongmoreC.A.WillsA.J. (2008). Processes of overall similarity sorting in free classification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 676–692doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.3.676.
35.
MummeryC.J.PattersonK.PriceC.J.AshburnerJ.FrackowiakR.S. J.HodgesJ. (2000). A voxel-based morphometry study of semantic dementia: Relationship between temporal lobe atrophy and semantic dementia.Annals of Neurology, 47, 36–45doi:10.1002/1531-8249(200001)47:1<36::AID-ANA8>3.0.CO;2-L.
36.
MurphyG.L. (2002). The big book of concepts, MIT PressCambridge, MA.
37.
MurphyG.L.AllopennaP.D. (1994). The locus of knowledge effects in concept learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 20, 904–919doi:10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.904.
38.
MurphyG.L.BrownellH.H. (1985). Category differentiation in object recognition: Typicality constraints on the basic category advantage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 11, 70–84doi:10.1037/0278-7393.11.1.70.
39.
MurphyG.L.MedinD.L. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence.Psychological Review, 92, 289–316doi:10.1037/0033-295X.92.3.289.
40.
MurphyG.L.SmithE.E. (1982). Basic-level superiority in picture categorisation.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 1–20doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90412-1.
41.
NestorP.J.FryerT.D.HodgesJ.R. (2006). Declarative memory impairments in Alzheimer's disease and semantic dementia.NeuroImage, 30, 1010–1020doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.10.008.
42.
NosofskyR.M.PalmeriT.J. (1997). An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification.Psychological Review, 104, 266–300doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.266.
43.
Op de BeeckH.TorfsK.WagemansJ. (2008). Perceived shape similarity among unfamiliar objects and the organization of the human object vision pathway.The Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 10111–10123doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2511-08.2008.
44.
PattersonK.HodgesJ.Semantic dementia: One window on the structure and organization of semantic memory.Handbook of neuropsychology: Vol. 2. Memory and its disorders, CermakJ. (2000). Elsevier ScienceAmsterdam, The Netherlands313–333.
45.
PickeringM.ChaterN. (1995). Why cognitive science is not formalized folk psychology.Minds and Machines, 5, 309–337doi:10.1007/BF00974748.
46.
PothosE.M.ChaterN. (2002). A simplicity principle in unsupervised human categorization.Cognitive Science, 26, 303–343doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(02)00064-2.
47.
PothosE.M.CloseJ. (2008). One or two dimensions in spontaneous classification: A simplicity approach.Cognition, 107, 581–602doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.007.
PothosE.M.WolffJ.G. (2006). The simplicity and power model for inductive inference.Artificial Intelligence Review, 26, 211–225doi:10.1007/s10462-007-9058-x.
50.
RandW.M. (1971). Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 66, 846–850.
51.
RissanenJ. (1989). Stochastic complexity and statistical inquiry, World ScientificSingapore.
52.
RogersT.T.Lambon RalphM.A.GarrardP.BozeatS.McClellandJ.L.HodgesJ.R. (2004). The structure and deterioration of semantic memory: A computational and neuropsychological investigation.Psychological Review, 111, 205–235doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.1.205.
53.
RogersT.T.Lambon RalphM.A.HodgesJ.R.PattersonK. (2003). Object recognition under semantic impairment: The effects of conceptual regularities on perceptual decisions.Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 625–662doi:10.1080/01690960344000053.
54.
RogersT.T.Lambon RalphM.A.HodgesJ.R.PattersonK. (2004). Natural selection: The impact of semantic impairment on lexical and object decision.Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 331–352doi:10.1080/02643290342000366.
55.
RogersT.T.McClellandJ.L. (2004). Semantic cognition: A parallel distributed processing approach, MIT PressCambridge, MA.
56.
RogersT.T.PattersonK. (2007). Object categorization: Reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 451–469doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.3.451.
57.
RoschE.MervisC.B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories.Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573–605doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9.
58.
RoschE.MervisC.B.GrayW.JohnsonD.Boyes-BraemP. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories.Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382–439doi:10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-X.
59.
SchynsP.G.PetroL.S.SmithM.L. (2007). Dynamics of visual information integration in the brain for categorizing facial expressions.Current Biology, 17, 1580–1585doi:10.1016/j.cub.2007.08.048.
60.
TanakaJ.TaylorM. (1991). Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder.Cognitive Psychology, 23, 457–482doi:10.1016/0010-0285(91)90016-H.
61.
TenenbaumJ.B.GriffithsT.L.KempC. (2006). Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 309–318doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.05.009.
62.
WarringtonE.K. (1975). Selective impairment of semantic memory.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27, 635–657doi:10.1080/14640747508400525.
63.
WisniewskiE.J. (1995). Prior knowledge and functionally relevant features in concept learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 21, 449–468doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.2.449.
