Relations between premise similarity and inductive strength

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 340-344

  Heit, Evan ^a   Feeney, Aidan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 23744445118     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196382     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. FRIED, L. S., & HOLYOAK, K. J. (1984). Induction of category distributions: A framework for classification learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 234-257.
2. HAYES, B. K., GOODHEW, A., HEIT, E., & GILLAN, J. (2003). The role of diverse instruction in conceptual change. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 86, 253-276.
3. HEIT, E. (1998). A Bayesian analysis of some forms of inductive reasoning. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (Eds.), Rational models of cognition (pp. 248-274). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. HEIT, E. (2000). Properties of inductive reasoning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 569-592.
5. HEIT, E., & HAHN, U. (2001). Diversity-based reasoning in children. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 243-273.
6. HEIT, E., HAHN, U., & FEENEY, A. (2005). Defending diversity. In W.-K. Ahn, R. L. Goldstone, A. B. Markman, & P. Wolff (Eds.), Categorization inside and outside of the laboratory: Essays in honor of Douglas L. Medin (pp. 87-99). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7. HEIT, E., & RUBINSTEIN, J. (1994). Similarity and property effects in inductive reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 411-422.
8. HOMA, D., & VOSBURGH, R. (1976). Category breadth and the abstraction of prototypical information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 2, 322-330.
9. KIM, N. S., & KEIL, F. C. (2003). From symptoms to causes: Diversity effects in diagnostic reasoning. Memory & Cognition, 31, 155-165.
10. KINCANNON, A., & SPELLMAN, B. A. (2003). The use of category and similarity information in limiting hypotheses. Memory & Cognition, 31, 114-132.
11. LÓPEZ, A. (1995). The diversity principle in the testing of arguments. Memory & Cognition, 23, 374-382.
12. LÓPEZ, A., ATRAN, S., COLEY, J. D., MEDIN, D. L., & SMITH, E. E. (1997). The tree of life: Universal and cultural features of folkbiological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 251-295.
13. MEDIN, D. L., COLEY, J. D., STORMS, G., & HAYES, B. K. (2003). A relevance theory of induction. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 517-532.
14. MEDIN, D. L., GOLDSTONE, R. L., & GENTNER, D. (1993). Respects for similarity. Psychological Review, 100, 254-278.
15. OSHERSON, D. N., SMITH, E. E., WILKIE, O., LÓPEZ, A., & SHAFIR, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97, 185-200.
16. POSNER, M. I., & KEELE, S. W. (1968). On the genesis of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 353-363.
17. PROFFITT, J. B., COLEY, J. D., & MEDIN, D. L. (2000). Expertise and category-based induction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 811-828.
18. SALMON, W. C. (1984). Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
19. SLOMAN, S. A. (1993). Feature-based induction. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 231-280.
20. TENENBAUM, J. B., & GRIFFITHS, T. L. (2001). Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 24, 629-641.