Exemplar and prototype models revisited: response strategies, selective attention, and stimulus generalization.
J. D. Smith and colleagues (J. P. Minda & J. D. Smith, 2001; J. D. Smith & J. P. Minda, 1998,2000; J. D. Smith, M. J. Murray, & J. P. Minda, 1997) presented evidence that they claimed challenged the predictions of exemplar models and that supported prototype models. In the authors' view, this evidence confounded the issue of the nature of the category representation with the type of response rule (probabilistic vs. deterministic) that was used. Also, their designs did not test whether the prototype models correctly predicted generalization performance. The present work demonstrates that an exemplar model that includes a response-scaling mechanism provides a natural account of all of Smith et al.'s experimental results. Furthermore, the exemplar model predicts classification performance better than the prototype models when novel transfer stimuli are included in the experimental designs.
Nosofsky
Robert M
RM
nosofsky@indiana.edu
Zaki
Safa R
SR
D001288:Attention; D003210:Concept Formation; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D005260:Female; D005544:Forecasting; D005793:Generalization, Psychological; D005795:Generalization, Stimulus; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008606:Mental Processes; D011939:Mental Recall; D008960:Models, Psychological; D011897:Random Allocation; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014163:Transfer, Psychology