The purpose of this research is to improve understanding of the consistency of the categorization process in cognitive psychology. To investigate the temporal stability of the categorization process between and within subjects, 100 participants (M = 22.1 yr., SD = 2.1) were required to sort 65 food labels into groups and to explain their grouping. The sorting and property generation of food labels were compared by conducting two sessions (with a 15-day interval) to assess within-subject variability. Two groups of participants were compared to assess between-subjects variability. The results from the sorting task showed excellent stability between and within subjects. Conversely, the property generation task showed high variability. It is concluded that the tasks involved different types of knowledge. The sorting task appeared to generate good agreement and to involve more stable knowledge. The task of producing properties may involve other mechanisms. This paper discusses the results in light of cognitive and pragmatic theories.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonR. C., & OrtonyA. (1975) On putting apples into bottles: a problem of polysemy. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 167–180.
2.
BarsalouL. W. (1989) Intraconcept similarity and its implication for interconcept similarity. In VosniadouS. & OrtonyA. (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer. Press. Pp. 76–120.
3.
BarsalouL. W.SpindlerJ. L.SewellD. R.BallatoS. M., & GendelE. M. (1987) Assessing the instability of category representations with property generation. Unpublished manuscript. Cited in Barsalou, L. W. (1989), Intraconcept similarity and its implications for interconcept similarity. In VosniadouS. & OrtonyA. (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer. Press. Pp. 76–120.
4.
BellezzaF. S. (1984a) Reliability of retrieval from semantic memory: information about people. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 511–513.
5.
BellezzaF. S. (1984b) Reliability of retrieval from semantic memory: noun meanings. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 377–380.
6.
BellezzaF. S. (1984c) Reliability of retrieval from semantic memory: common categories. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 324–326.
7.
TiestBergmann W. M., & KappersA. M. L. (2006) Analysis of haptic perception of materials by multidimensional scaling and physical measurements of roughness and compressibility. Acta Psychologica, 121, 1–20.
8.
BosterJ. S. (1991) The information economy model applied to biological similarity judgment. In ResnikL.LevineJ., & TeasleyS. (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pp. 203–225.
9.
CartierR.RytzA.LecomteA.PobleteF.KrystlikJ., & BelinE. (2006) Sorting procedure as an alternative to quantitative descriptive analysis to obtain a product sensory map. Food Quality and Preference, 17, 562–571.
10.
CreeG. S., & McRaeK. (2003) Analyzing the factors underlying the structure and computation of the meaning of chipmunk, cherry, chisel, cheese, and cello (and many other such concrete nouns). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 163–201.
11.
EiberR.Mirabel-SarronC., & UrdapilletaI. (2005) Les cognitions et leur evaluation dans les troubles des conduites alimentaires. L'encéphale, 31, 643–652.
12.
GarnerD. M., & GarfinkelP. E. (1979) The Eating Attitudes Test: an index of the symptoms of anorexia nervosa. Psychological Medicine, 9, 273–279.
13.
GriceH. P. (1957) Meaning. Philosophical Review, 66, 377–388.
14.
HartiganJ. A., & WongM. A. (1979) Algorithm AS 136: a K-means clustering algorithm. Applied Statistics, 28, 100–108.
15.
KleinH. A.LinM. H.RadfordM.MasudaT.ChoiI.LienY.YehY., & BoffK. R. (2009) Cultural differences in cognition: Rosetta Phase I. Psychological Reports, 105, 659–674.
16.
KotovskyL., & GentnerD. (1996) Comparison and categorization in the development of relational similarity. Child Development, 67, 2797–2822.
17.
KruskalJ. B. (1964) Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a non-metric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29, 1–27.
18.
LopezA.AtranS.ColeyJ. D., & MedinD. L. (1997) The tree of life: universal and cultural features of folkbiolological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 251–295.
19.
ManettaC.Sales-WuilleminE.GaillardA., & UrdapilletaI. (2011) Verbal representation of fragrances: dependence on the specific task. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 656–679.
20.
MarkmanA. B., & WisniewskiE. J. (1997) Similar and different: the differentiation of basic level categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 54–70.
21.
MedinD. L.LynchE. B.ColeyJ. D., & AtranS. (1997) Categorization and reasoning among tree experts: do all roads lead to Rome?Cognitive Psychology, 32, 49–96.
PoitrenaudS.RichardJ. F., & TijusC. (2005) Properties, categories, and categorization. Thinking and Reasoning, 11, 151–208.
24.
RossB. H., & MurphyL. M. (1999) Food for thought: cross-classification and category organization in a complex real-world domain. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 495–553.
25.
SokalR. R., & SneathP. H. A. (1963) Principles of numerical taxonomy. San Francisco: Freeman.
26.
SperberD., & WilsonD. (1987) Précis of relevance: communication and cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 697–710.
27.
StormsG.Van MechelenI., & De BoeckP. (1994) Structural analysis of the intension and extension of semantic concepts. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 6, 43–75.
28.
StunkardA. J., & MessickS. (1985) The Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire to measure dietary restraint, disinhibition, and hunger. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 29, 71–83.
29.
ThompsonD. M., & TulvingE. (1970) Associative encoding and retrieval: weak and strong cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86, 255–262.
30.
TorgensonW. S. (1952) Multidimensional scaling: theory and method. Psychometrika, 17, 401–419.
31.
UnsworthS. J.SearsC. R., & PexmanP. M. (2005) Cultural influences on categorization processes. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 36, 662–688.
32.
UrdapilletaI.Mirabel-SarronC.EiberR., & RichardJ. F. (2005) What categorization tells us about food representation. Current Psychology Letters, 17. Retrieved from http://cp1.revues.org/index457.html
33.
WinczeJ. P.SteketeeG., & FrostR. O. (2007) Categorization in compulsive hoarding. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45, 63–72.
34.
WordenP. E., & RitcheyG. H. (1979) The development of the category-recall relationship in the sorting-recall task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 27, 384–394.
