A theory of variability discrimination: Finding differences

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 14, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 805-822

  Young, Michael E ^a   Wasserman, Edward A ^b   Ellefson, Michelle R ^c  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 37349057202     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194106     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. ARIELY, D. (2001). Seeing sets: Representation by statistical properties. Psychological Science, 12, 157-162.
2. ASHBY, F. G., & GOTT, R. E. (1988). Decision rules in the perception and categorization of multidimensional stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory. & Cognition, 14, 33-53.
3. BAUMOL, W. J., & IDE, E. A. (1956). Variety in retailing. Management Science, 3, 93-101.
4. BERLYNE, D. E. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
5. BRONIARCZYK, S. M., HOYER, W. D., & MCALISTER, L. (1998). Consumers' perceptions of the assortment offered in a grocery category: The impact of item reduction. Journal of Marketing Research, 35, 166-176.
6. CARACO, T. (1981). Energy budgets, risk and foraging preferences in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hymelais). Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 8, 820-830.
7. CARACO, T., MARTINDALE, S., & WHITTAM, T. S. (1980). An empirical demonstration of risk sensitive foraging preferences. Animal Behaviour, 28, 820-830.
8. CASTRO, L., YOUNG, M. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (2002, April). Same-different learning in the pigeon: Entropy and similarity. Paper presented at the IV Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Psicologia Experimental (Fourth Conference of the Spanish Society of Experimental Psychology), Oviedo, Spain.
9. CHONG, S. C., & TREISMAN, A. (2003). Representation of statistical properties. Vision Research, 43, 393-404.
10. CHONG, S. C., & TREISMAN, A. (2005). Statistical processing: Computing the average size in perceptual groups. Vision Research, 45, 891-900.
11. COOK, R. G., CAVOTO, K. K., & CAVOTO, B. R. (1995). Same-different texture discrimination and concept learning by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 21, 253-260.
12. COOK, R. G., KATZ, J. S., & CAVOTO, B. R. (1997). Pigeon same-different concept learning with multiple stimulus classes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 417-433.
13. DELIUS, J. D., & HOLLARD, V. D. (1995). Orientation invariant pattern recognition by pigeons (Columba livia) and humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 109, 278-290.
14. DUNCAN, J., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1989). Visual search and stimulus similarity. Psychological Review, 96, 433-458.
15. EISENMAN, R., HANNON, J. E., & BERNARD, J. L. (1966). Perceived creativity, set, and preference for simple or complex shapes. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 22, 111-114.
16. 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.
17. GIBSON, B. M., WASSERMAN, E. A., & COOK, R. G. (2006). Not all same-different discriminations are created equal: Evidence contrary to a unidimensional account of same-different learning. Learning & Motivational, 189-208.
18. HOCH, S. J., BRADLOW, E. T., & WANSINK, B. (1999). The variety of an assortment. Marketing Science, 18, 527-546.
19. KAHN, B. E., & WANSINK, B. (2004). The influence of assortment structure on perceived variety and consumption quantities. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 519-533.
20. KASHIMA, E. S., & KASHIMA, Y. (1993). Perceptions of general variability of social groups. Social Cognition, 11, 1-21.
21. MCGREGOR, P. K., KREBS, J. R., & PERRINS, C. M. (1981). Song repertoires and lifetime reproductive success in the great tit (Parus major). American Naturalist, 118, 149-159.
22. MUNSINGER, H. (1966). Multivariate analysis of preference for variability. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 889-895.
23. MUNSINGER, H., & KESSEN, W. (1966). Preference and recall of stimulus variability. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 311-312.
24. MYUNG, I. J. (2000). The importance of complexity in model selection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 44, 190-204.
25. NEURINGER, A. (2004). Reinforced variability in animals and people: Implications for adaptive action. American Psychologist, 59, 891-906.
26. NOSOFSKY, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experiment Psychology: General, 115, 39-57.
27. NOTHDURFT, H. C. (1991). Different effects from spatial frequency masking in texture segregation and texton detection tasks. Vision Research, 31, 299-320.
28. PARKES, L., LUND, J., ANGELUCCI, A., SOLOMON, J. A., & MORGAN, M. (2001). Compulsory averaging of crowded orientation signals in human vision. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 739-744.
29. PITT, M. A., MYUNG, I. J., & ZHANG, S. (2002). Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. Psychological Review, 109, 472-491.
30. SEARCY, W. A. (1984). Song repertoire size and female preferences in some sparrows. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology, 14, 281-286.
31. SHANNON, C. E., & WEAVER, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
32. 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.), The perception of structure: Essays in honor of Wendell R. Garner (pp. 53-71). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
33. SKINNER, B. F. (1981). Selection by consequences. Science, 213, 501-504.
34. TREISMAN, A. M., & GELADE, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
35. WASSERMAN, E. A., YOUNG, M. E., & COOK, R. G. (2004). Variability discrimination in humans and animals: Implications for adaptive action. American Psychologist, 59, 869-878.
36. WASSERMAN, E. A., YOUNG, M. E., & NOLAN, B. C. (2000). Display variability and spatial organization as contributors to the pigeon's discrimination of complex visual stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 26, 133-143.
37. WOLFE, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.
38. YOERG, S. I. (2001). Clever as a fox. New York: Bloomsbury.
39. YOUNG, M. E., CASTRO, L., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (2002). Multidimensional variability discrimination in the pigeon. Unpublished manuscript.
40. YOUNG, M. E., & ELLEFSON, M. R. (2003). The joint contributions of shape and color to variability discrimination. Learning & Motivation, 34, 52-67.
41. YOUNG, M. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (1997). Entropy detection by pigeons: Response to mixed visual displays after same-different discrimination training. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 157-170.
42. YOUNG, M. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (2001a). Entropy and variability discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 278-293.
43. YOUNG, M. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (2001b). Evidence for a conceptual account of same-different discrimination learning in the pigeon. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 677-684.
44. YOUNG, M. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (2002). Detecting variety: What's so special about sameness? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 131-143.
45. YOUNG, M. E., & WASSERMAN, E. A. (2003). Visual variability discrimination. In S. A. Soraci & K. Murata-Soraci (Eds.), Perspectives on fundamental processes in intellectual functioning: Visual information processing (Vol. 2, pp. 171-197), Stamford, CT: Ablex.
46. YOUNG, M. E., WASSERMAN, E. A., & GARNER, K. L. (1997). Effects of number of items on the pigeon's discrimination of same from different visual displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 491-501.