Comparing exemplar-retrieval and decision-bound models of speeded perceptual classification

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 59, Issue 7, 1997, Pages 1027-1048

  Nosofsky, Robert M ^a   Palmeri, Thomas J ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECISION MAKING; HEARING; HUMAN; MEMORY; REACTION TIME;

DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MEMORY; PITCH PERCEPTION; REACTION TIME;

EID: 0031241513     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03205518     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. ASHBY, F. G., BOYNTON, G., & LEE, W. W. (1994). Categorization response time with multidimensional stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 11-27.
2. ASHBY, F. G., & GOTT, R. (1988). Decision rules in the perception and categorization of multidimensional stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 33-53.
3. ASHBY, F. G., & MADDOX, W. T. (1991). A response time theory of perceptual independence. In J. P. Doignon & J. C. Falmagne (Eds.), Mathematical psychology: Current developments (pp. 389-414). New York: Springer-Verlag.
4. ASHBY, F. G., & MADDOX, W. T. (1994). A response time theory of perceptual separability and perceptual integrality in speeded classification. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 38, 423-466.
5. ASHBY, F. G., & TOWNSEND, J. T. (1986). Varieties of perceptual independence. Psychological Review, 93, 154-179.
6. BUNDESEN, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523-547.
7. BUSEMEYER, J. R. (1982). Choice behavior in a sequential decision-making task. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 29, 175-207.
8. DURLACH, N. I., & BRAIDA, L. D. (1969). Intensity perception. I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46, 372-383.
9. FLETCHER, B., & RABBITT, P. M. A. (1978). The changing pattern of perceptual analytic strategies and response selection with practice in a two-choice reaction time task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 417-427.
10. GARNER, W. R. (1974). The processing of information and structure. New York: Wiley.
11. GARNER, W. R. (1976). Interaction of stimulus dimensions in concept and choice processes. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 98-123.
12. GARNER, W. R., & FELFOLDY, G. L. (1970). Integrality of stimulus dimensions in various types of information processing. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 225-241.
13. GRAU, J. W., & KEMLER NELSON, D. G. (1988). The distinction between integral and separable dimensions: Evidence for the integrality of pitch and loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 347-370.
14. KINGSTON, J., & MACMILLAN, N. A. (1995). Integrality of nasalization and F1 in vowels in isolation and before oral and nasal consonants: A detection-theoretic application of the Garner paradigm. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 1261-1285.
15. KRUEGER, L. E., & SHAPIRO, R. G. (1981). Intertrial effects of same-different judgements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 241-265.
16. LAMBERTS, K. (1995). Categorization under time pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 161-180.
17. LAMBERTS, K. (1996). The time course of categorization. Manuscript submitted for publication.
18. LINK, S. W., & HEATH, R. A. (1975). A sequential theory of psychological discrimination. Psychometrika, 40, 77-105.
19. LOCKHEAD, G. R., & KING, M. C. (1977). Classifying integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 3, 436-443.
20. LOGAN, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492-527.
21. LOGAN, G. D. (1992). Shapes of reaction time distributions and shapes of learning curves: A test of the instance theory of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 883-914.
22. LOGAN, G. D. (1997). The CODE theory of visual attention: An integration of space-based and object-based attention. Psychological Review, 103, 603-649.
23. LUCE, R. D. (1986). Response times: Their role in inferring elementary mental organization. New York: Oxford University Press.
24. LUCE, R. D., GREEN, D. M., & WEBER, D. L. (1976). Attention bands in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 49-54.
25. MADDOX, W. T., & ASHBY, F. G. (1996). Perceptual separability, decisional separability, and the identification-speeded classification relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 795-817.
26. MARLEY, A. A. J. (1992). Developing and characterizing multidimensional Thurstone and Luce models for identification and preference. In F. G. Ashby (Ed.), Multidimensional models of perception and cognition (pp. 299-333). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. MARLEY, A. A. J., & COOK, V. T. (1984). A fixed rehearsal capacity interpretation of limits of absolute identification performance. British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, 37, 136-151.
28. MCKINLEY, S. C., & NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1996). Selective attention and the formation of linear decision boundaries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 294-317.
29. MELARA, R. D., & MARKS, L. E. (1990). Perceptual primacy of dimensions: Support for a model of dimensional interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 16, 398-414.
30. MELARA, R. D., & MOUNTS, J. R. W. (1994). Contextual influences on interactive processing: Effects of discriminability, quantity, and uncertainty. Perception & Psychophysics, 56, 73-90.
31. MELARA, R. D., MOUNTS, J. R. W., & YAMAGISHI, N. (1993, November). Why does selective attention fail? Paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, D.C.
32. MURDOCK, B. B., JR. (1985). An analysis of the strength-latency relationship. Memory & Cognition, 13, 511-521.
33. NEWELL. A., & ROSENBLOOM, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 1-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. NOBEL, P. (1996). Response times in recognition and recall. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
35. NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1984). Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 104-114.
36. NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39-57.
37. NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1987). Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 87-109.
38. NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1992). Similarity scaling and cognitive process models. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 25-53.
39. NOSOFSKY, R. M., & PALMERI, T. J. (1996). Learning to classify integral-dimension stimuli. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 222-226.
40. NOSOFSKY, R. M., & PALMERI, T. J. (1997). An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. Psychological Review, 104, 266-300.
41. PALMERI, T. J. (1997). Exemplar similarity and the development of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 324-354.
42. POMERANTZ, J. R., & GARNER, W. R. (1973). Stimulus configuration in selective attention tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 14, 565-569.
43. PURKS, S. R., CALLAHAN, D. J., BRAIDA, L. D., & DURLACH, N. I. (1980). Intensity perception: X. Effect of preceding stimulus on identification performance. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 634-637.
44. RAAB, D. H. (1962). Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 24, 574-590.
45. RATCLIFF, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446-461.
46. RATCLIFF, R., & MURDOCK, B. B. (1976). Retrieval processes in recognition memory. Psychological Review, 83, 190-214.
47. SHEPARD, R. N. (1964). Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 1, 54-87.
48. SHEPARD, R. N. (1987). Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science, 237, 1317-1323.
49. SHEPARD, R. N. (1991). Integrality versus separability of stimulus dimensions: From an early convergence of evidence to a proposed theoretical basis. In G. R. Lockhead & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Perception of structure: Essays in honor of Wendell R. Garner (pp. 53-71). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
50. SHEPARD, R. N., & CHANG, J. J. (1963). Stimulus generalization in the learning of classifications. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 94-102.
51. THOMAS, R. (1996). A mathematical model of perceptual interactions in the same-different task: Theory and data. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
52. TOWNSEND, J. T., & ASHBY, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. New York: Cambridge University Press.
53. TVERSKY, A., & GATI, I. (1982). Similarity, separability, and the triangle inequality. Psychological Review, 89, 123-154.