Comparing objects in memory: Evidence suggesting an internal psychophysics

Moyer, Robert S.

doi:10.3758/bf03214124

Cited by 372 publications

(283 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

248

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This notion goes back at least to Moyer (1973), who referred to an ''internal psychophysics'' for symbolic comparisons. Behavioral studies have identified striking parallels between symbolic distance effects and those observed in overt perceptual comparisons (e.g., Holyoak & Patterson, 1981;Moyer & Bayer, 1976).…”

Section: Alternative Models Of Symbolic Magnitude Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, both perceptual and symbolic judgments yield a distance effect, such that the ease of judgments (indexed by accuracy and/or reaction time) increases with the magnitude difference between the objects being compared (e.g., Moyer, 1973;Moyer & Bayer, 1976;Moyer & Landauer, 1967). A symbolic distance effect is observed not only with quasi-perceptual dimensions such as size, but also with more abstract dimensions such as animal intelligence (Banks, White, Sturgill, & Mermelstein, 1983) and with scalar adjectives of quality (e.g., good, fair; Holyoak & Walker, 1976).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes

Chen

Holyoak

2014

Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tHumans and other primates are able to make relative magnitude comparisons, both with perceptual stimuli and with symbolic inputs that convey magnitude information. Although numerous models of magnitude comparison have been proposed, the basic question of how symbolic magnitudes (e.g., size or intelligence of animals) are derived and represented in memory has received little attention. We argue that symbolic magnitudes often will not correspond directly to elementary features of individual concepts. Rather, magnitudes may be formed in working memory based on computations over more basic features stored in long-term memory. We present a model of how magnitudes can be acquired and compared based on BARTlet, a representationally simpler version of Bayesian Analogy with Relational Transformations (BART; Lu, Chen, & Holyoak, 2012). BARTlet operates on distributions of magnitude variables created by applying dimension-specific weights (learned with the aid of empirical priors derived from pre-categorical comparisons) to more primitive features of objects. The resulting magnitude distributions, formed and maintained in working memory, are sensitive to contextual influences such as the range of stimuli and polarity of the question. By incorporating psychological reference points that control the precision of magnitudes in working memory and applying the tools of signal detection theory, BARTlet is able to account for a wide range of empirical phenomena involving magnitude comparisons, including the symbolic distance effect and the semantic congruity effect. We discuss the role of reference points in cognitive and social decision-making, and implications for the evolution of relational representations.

show abstract

Section: Alternative Models Of Symbolic Magnitude Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes

Chen

Holyoak

2014

Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can be seen that RTs generally decreased as the size difference increased. thus replicating the general function obtained by Moyer (1973). In addition.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each type included three pairs from each of six different larger/smaller size ratios, namely, 1.17, lAO, 1.75, 2.33, 3.50, and 7.0. These were selected so as to sample the range of size differences used in Moyer's (1973) experiment. with the sampled differences converted into ratios according to the normative ratings in Table I of the present study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual comparisons through the mind’s eye

1975

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments tested a theory of memory and cognition which assumes that verbal and nonverbal information are processed in functionally distinct LTM systems. Subjects presented with pairs of pictures or printed names of animals and objects differing in rated real-life size were instructed to choose the conceptually larger member of each pair. the one that appeared to be farther away. or the one whose name was easier to pronounce. The following results were consistent with theoretical predictions: (1) RT to choose the larger member increased as the memory size difference decreased, for comparisons between as well as within conceptual categories; (2) memory size comparisons were faster with pictures than with words, whereas the reverse occurred for pronounceability comparisons; (3) with pictures, but not with words, size comparisons were significantly slower when real-life (memory) size relations conflicted with physical size relations than when the two were congruent; and (4) the size congruency effect was reversed for relative distance judgments of pictured pairs. These results cannot be easily explained by current verbal coding or abstract (propositional) theories of LTM representations.Moyer (1973) reported a study in which subjects compared the sizes of named animals from memory. The animal names had been previously ranked by the subjects according to their judgments of the relative sizes of the animals themselves. In the experimental task, subjects were visually presented the names of two animals, such as frog-wolf, and were required to throw a switch under the name of the larger animal. The result was that the reaction time (RT) for the choice increased systematically as the difference in animal size became smaller. Specifically. RT was largely an inverse linear function of the logarithm of the estimated difference in animal size. Since this function is similar to the one obtained when subjects make direct perceptual comparisons of patterns differing in size, Moyer argued that subjects compare animal names by making an "internal psychophysical judgment" after first converting the names to analog representations that preserve animal size. Smaller size differences between animals presumably are represented as smaller differences between the internal analogs, and the resulting decreased discriminability is ret1ected in increased reaction times.Moyer's study is unusually relevant to the question of how information about the perceptual world is represented in long-term memory. Although the experiment was not designed explicitly to test such a theory. the results are generally consistent with a dual coding approach according to which verbal and nonverbal information are represented and processed in functionally independent, though interconnected,

show abstract

“…This finding, called the distance effect, was previously found in perceptual comparisons of various materials, for example, the length of bars (Johnson, 1939). Since then, it has been reproduced many times with miscellaneous materials: digits (Banks, Fujii, & Kayra-Stuart, 1976;Buckley & Gilman, 1974;Parkman, 1971;Sekuler & Mierkiewicz, 1977;Sekuler, Rubin, & Armstrong, 1971; see also Restle, 1970), two-digit numbers (Hinrichs, Yurko, & Hu, 1981), dot arrays compared for numerosity (Buckley & Gilman, 1974), objects indicated by name and compared for size (Holyoak, 1977;Kosslyn, Murphy, Bemesderfer, & Feinstein, 1977;Moyer, 1973), and abstract orderings with no physical counterpart (Woocher, Glass, & Holyoak, 1978). One particularly compelling experiment (Buckley & Gilman, 1974) should be noted, in which the same subjects were tested in two different paradigms: comparison of numerosities and comparison of digits.…”

Section: Is Numerical Comparison Digital? Analogical and Symbolic Effmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison.

Dehaene¹,

Dupoux²,

Mehler³

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

623

702

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do Ss compare multidigit numbers digit by digit (symbolic model) or do they compute the whole magnitude of the numbers before comparing them (holistic model)? In 4 experiments of timed 2-digit number comparisons with a fixed standard, the findings of Hinrichs, Yurko, and Hu (1981) were extended with French Ss. Reaction times (RTs) decreased with target-standard distance, with discontinuities at the boundaries of the standard's decade appearing only with standards 55 and 66 but not with 65. The data are compatible with the holistic model. A symbolic interference model that posits the simul~meous comparison of decades and units can also account for the results. To separate the 2 models, the decades and units digits of target numbers were presented asynchronously in Experiment 4. Contrary to the prediction of the interference model, presenting the units before the decades did not change the influence of units on RTs. Pros and cons of the holistic model are discusseft.

show abstract

Comparing objects in memory: Evidence suggesting an internal psychophysics

Cited by 372 publications

References 8 publications

The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes

The discovery and comparison of symbolic magnitudes

Perceptual comparisons through the mind’s eye

Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About