title: Missing the forest for the trees: object-discrimination learning blocks categorization learning.
abstract: Growing evidence indicates that error-driven associative learning underlies the ability of nonhuman animals to categorize natural images. This study explored whether this form of learning might also be at play when people categorize natural objects in photographs. Two groups of college students (a blocking group and a control group) were trained on a categorization task and then tested with novel photographs from each category; however, only the blocking group received pretraining on a task that required the discrimination of objects from the same category. Because of this earlier noncategorical discrimination learning, the blocking group performed well in the categorization task from the outset, and this strong initial performance reduced the likelihood of category learning driven by error. There was far less transfer of categorical responding during testing in the blocking group than in the control group; this finding suggests that learning the specific properties of each photographic image in pretraining blocked later learning of an open-ended category.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. fabian-soto@uiowa.edu
authors.forename: Fabian A
authors.initials: FA
authors.lastname: Soto
authors.forename: Edward A
authors.initials: EA
authors.lastname: Wasserman
mesh_terms: D001245:Association Learning; D001288:Attention; D004193:Discrimination Learning; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011939:Mental Recall; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011214:Practice, Psychological; D014163:Transfer, Psychology
references.citation: Cognition. 2009 Dec;113(3):259-261
references.pmid: 19819429
references.citation: Annu Rev Neurosci. 2000;23:473-500
references.pmid: 10845072
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2010 Apr;117(2):349-81
references.pmid: 20438230
references.citation: Cognition. 1990 Nov;37(1-2):133-66
references.pmid: 2269005
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Apr 10;104(15):6424-9
references.pmid: 17404214
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004 Apr;5(4):291-303
references.pmid: 15034554
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1984 Jan;10(1):104-14
references.pmid: 6242730
references.citation: Brain Res Bull. 2004 Apr 30;63(3):173-202
references.pmid: 15145138
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2007 Feb 20;17(4):336-40
references.pmid: 17275301
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Sep;117(3):227-47
references.pmid: 2971760
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 1996 Sep;3(3):314-21
references.pmid: 24213932
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 1999 Nov;2(11):1019-25
references.pmid: 10526343
references.citation: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2009 Dec;9(4):343-64
references.pmid: 19897789
references.citation: Cogn Sci. 2014 Aug;38(6):1024-77
references.pmid: 25087578
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992 Mar;18(2):211-33
references.pmid: 1532819