128 male and female Ss participated in a study in which information processing efficiencies for the visual and tactual modalities were compared. With the same set of stimulus objects used for the 2 modalities no difference between visual and tactual concept identification (CI) was obtained. Significant interactions were found between S's sex, relevant dimensions, and similarity of stimulus levels. Independent measures of the salience and discriminability of the stimulus dimensions were obtained in an attempt to relate these factors to CI performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BulgarellaR. G.ArcherE. J.Concept identification of auditory stimuli as a function of amount of relevant and irrelevant information. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1962, 63, 254–257.
2.
PishkinV.Effects of probability of misinformation and number of irrelevant dimensions upon concept identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960, 59, 371–378.
3.
PishkinV.BlanchardR. J.Auditory concept identification as a function of subject's sex and stimulus dimension. Psychonomic Science, 1964, 1, 177–178.
4.
PishkinV.ShurleyJ. T.Auditory dimensions and irrelevant information in concept identification of males and females. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 20, 673–683.
5.
RasmussenE. A.PishkinV.Cue availability and cue saliency in concept identification of children. Paper read at Tenth Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, Mo., November, 1969.
6.
WolfgangA.A comparison of tactile and visual concept learning. Psychonomic Science, 1969, 14, 175–176.
