The effect of perceived within-category variability through its examples on category-based inductive generalization

범주예시에 의해 지각된 범주내 변산성이 범주기반 귀납적 일반화에 미치는 효과

  • Lee, Guk-Hee (Department of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University) ;
  • Kim, ShinWoo (Department of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University) ;
  • Li, Hyung-Chul O. (Department of Industrial Psychology, Kwangwoon University)
  • 이국희 (광운대학교 산업심리학과) ;
  • 김신우 (광운대학교 산업심리학과) ;
  • 이형철 (광운대학교 산업심리학과)
  • Received : 2014.08.01
  • Accepted : 2014.09.06
  • Published : 2014.09.30

Abstract

Category-based induction is one of major inferential reasoning methods used by humans. This research tested the effect of perceived within-category variability on the inductive generalization. Experiment 1 manipulated variability by directly presenting category exemplars. After displaying low variable (low variability condition) or highly variable exemplars (high variability condition) depending on condition, participants performed inductive generalization task about a category in question. The results showed that participants have greater confidence in generalization when category variability was low than when it was high. Rather than directly presenting category exemplars in Experiment 2, participants performed induction task after they formed category variability impression by categorization task of identifying category exemplars. Experiment 2 also found the tendency that participants have greater inductive confidence when category variability was low. The variability effect discovered in this research is distinct from the diversity effect in previous research and the category-based induction model proposed by Osherson et al. (1990) cannot fully account for the variability effect in this research. Test of variability effect in category-based induction is discussed in the general discussion section.

Keywords

inductive reasoning;within-category variability;categorization;properties generalization;category examples

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 광운대학교

References

  1. Barsalou, L. W. (1985). Ideals, central tendency, and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 629-654. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.11.1-4.629
  2. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
  3. Feeney, A., Gardiner, D. R. (2002). Category size and category-based induction. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ: LEA, 292-297.
  4. Hampton, J. A. (1979). Polymorphous concepts in semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 441-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90246-9
  5. Lopez, A. (1995). The diversity principle in the testing of arguments. Memory & Cognition, 23(3), 374-382. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197238
  6. McCloskey, M. E., & Glucksberg, S. (1978). Natural categories: Well defined or fuzzy sets? Memory & Cognition, 6, 462-472. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197480
  7. Malt, B. C., Ross, B. H, & Murphy. G. L. (1995). Predicting Features for Members of Natural Categories When Categorization Is Uncertain. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(3), 646-662. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.3.646
  8. Murphy, G. L., & Brownell, H. H. (1985). Category differentiation in object recognition: Typicality constraints on the basic category advantage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 70-84. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.11.1.70
  9. Murphy, G. L., & Ross, B. H. (1994). Predictions from uncertain categorizations. Cognitive Psychology, 27, 148-193. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1994.1015
  10. Murphy, G. L., & Ross, B. H. (2010a). Category vs. object knowledge in category-based induction. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.12.002
  11. Murphy, G. L., & Ross, B. H. (2010b). Uncertainty in category-based induction: When do people integrate across categories? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 263-276. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018685
  12. Murphy, G. L., Chen, S. Y., & Ross, B. H. (2012). Reasoning with uncertain categories Thinking & Reasoning, 18(1), 81-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2011.650506
  13. Nisbett R. E., Krantz, D. H., Jepson, C., & Kunda, Z. (1983). The use of statistical heutistics in everyday inductive reasoning. Psychological Review, 90(4), 339-363. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.339
  14. Osherson, D. N., Smith, E. E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A., & Shafir, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97(2), 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.2.185
  15. Patalano, A. L., Chin-Parker, S., & Ross, B. H. (2006). The importance of being coherent: Category coherence, cross-classification, and reasoning. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.10.005
  16. Patalano, A. L. & Ross, B. H. (2007). The role of category coherence in experience-based prediction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 629-634. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196812
  17. Rips, L. (1975). Inductive judgments about natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 665-681. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(75)80055-7
  18. Rein, J. R., Goldwater, M. B., & Markman, A. B. (2010). What is typical about the typicality effect in category-based induction?. Memory & Cognition, 38, 377-388. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.3.377
  19. Rehder, B. & Hastie, R. (1996). The moderating influence of variability on belief revision. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 499-503. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214554
  20. Rhodes, M., & Brickman, D. (2010). The rold of within-category variability in category-based induction: A developmental study. Cognitive Science, 34, 1561-1573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01137.x
  21. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblance: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9
  22. Ross, B. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1996). Category-based predictions: The influence of uncertainty and feature associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 736-753. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.3.736
  23. Thagard, P., & Nisbett R. E. (1982). Variability and Confirmation. Philosophical Studies, 42, 379-394. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00714369
  24. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive psychology, 5(2), 207-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9