title: Rules and resemblance: their changing balance in the category learning of humans (Homo sapiens) and monkeys (Macaca mulatta).
abstract: In an early dissociation between intentional and incidental category learning, Kemler Nelson (1984) gave participants a categorization task that could be performed by responding either to a single-dimensional rule or to overall family resemblance. Humans learning intentionally deliberately adopted rule-based strategies; humans learning incidentally adopted family resemblance strategies. The present authors replicated Kemler Nelson's human experiment and found a similar dissociation. They also extended her paradigm so as to evaluate the balance between rules and family resemblance in determining the category decisions of rhesus monkeys. Monkeys heavily favored the family resemblance strategy. Formal models showed that even after many sessions and thousands of trials, they spread attention across all stimulus dimensions rather than focus on a single, criterial dimension that could also produce perfect categorization.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA. jjc38@buffalo.edu
authors.forename: Justin J
authors.initials: JJ
authors.lastname: Couchman
authors.forename: Mariana V C
authors.initials: MV
authors.lastname: Coutinho
authors.forename: J David
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Smith
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000818:Animals; D001245:Association Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology; D003210:Concept Formation / Q000502:physiology*; D004193:Discrimination Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D033182:Intention; D008253:Macaca mulatta; D008297:Male; D008960:Models, Psychological; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1998 Jun;127(2):107-40
references.pmid: 9622910
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Sep;133(3):398-414
references.pmid: 15355146
references.citation: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 1996 Jun;3(3-4):319-27
references.pmid: 8806033
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1994 Oct;20(4):429-35
references.pmid: 7964525
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1999 Aug;61(6):1178-99
references.pmid: 10497436
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2008 Jul;34(3):361-74
references.pmid: 18665719
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1981 Aug;7(4):811-24
references.pmid: 6457093
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1983 Feb;9(1):103-12
references.pmid: 6220116
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2006 Dec;17(12):1059-67
references.pmid: 17201788
references.citation: Child Dev. 1982 Jun;53(3):768-79
references.pmid: 7094679
references.citation: Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1990;22(2):127-31
references.pmid: 11537555
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2001 May 1;5(5):204-210
references.pmid: 11323265
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Mar;8(1):168-76
references.pmid: 11340863
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1996 Oct;22(4):405-19
references.pmid: 8865609
references.citation: Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2004 Jun;3(2):101-13
references.pmid: 15537987
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 2010 Jan;36(1):54-65
references.pmid: 20141317
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1979 Feb;5(1):68-77
references.pmid: 528931
references.citation: Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1992;24(2):157-64
references.pmid: 11538700
references.citation: Nature. 2000 Oct 5;407(6804):630-3
references.pmid: 11034211
references.citation: J Comp Psychol. 1989 Mar;103(1):32-8
references.pmid: 2924530
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Feb;9(2):83-9
references.pmid: 15668101
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1987 Jan;15(1):42-54
references.pmid: 3821490
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1949 Jan;56(1):51-65
references.pmid: 18124807
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1988 Jan;16(1):79-89
references.pmid: 3340001
references.citation: J Exp Child Psychol. 1983 Dec;36(3):365-79
references.pmid: 6663235
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1994 Jan;101(1):53-79
references.pmid: 8121960
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2002 Mar;5(3):272-6
references.pmid: 11850633
references.citation: J Exp Anal Behav. 1990 Sep;54(2):69-84
references.pmid: 16812617
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1993 Sep;122(3):331-46
references.pmid: 8371088
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Dec;9(4):829-35
references.pmid: 12613690
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. 1976 Oct;2(4):285-302
references.pmid: 978139
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 1994 Nov;5(6):375-9
references.pmid: 11539143
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1998 Jul;105(3):442-81
references.pmid: 9697427