Discrimination learning decreases perceived similarity according to an objective measure

King, Donald L.; Shanks, S. Christina; Hart, Linda L.

doi:10.1007/bf00425833

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further, the bias explanation does not apply to the present similarity rating results (see the Discussion section of Experiment 3). In addition, it is questioned by evidence that poor-on-different performance is more closely associated with poor overall performance than is physical similarity (King, 1997; King, Shanks, & Hart, 1996; Krueger & Chignell, 1985; Scialfa & Thomas, 1994; see the Discussion section of Experiment 1 in the present article). This is because the poor overall performance is explained by high perceived similarity but not by bias, and thus, positing bias is not parsimonious.…”

Section: Purpose and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 84%

The length of the retention interval, forgetting, and subjective similarity.

King¹,

Jones²,

Pearlman³

et al. 2002

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A long retention interval tends to result in the poor retention known as forgetting. A high subjective similarity between stimuli frequently produces their poor retention. Thus, a long retention interval may increase the subjective similarity between stimuli (the RIISS hypothesis), and this increase may produce forgetting. To examine this hypothesis, college students made speeded same-different discriminations between two lines or tones of different lengths or frequencies that were 400 ms or 3,300 ms apart, and they rated the similarity of these stimuli. The long interval produced poorer overall performance as expected, but also produced poorer performance on different than same stimuli, implying that it increased the subjective similarity between the initial and subsequent stimuli, and it also increased rated similarity, in support of the RIISS hypothesis. The position that stored stimuli lose less common information than distinctive information explains RIISS evidence better than does perturbation theory.

show abstract

Section: Purpose and Measuresmentioning

confidence: 84%

The length of the retention interval, forgetting, and subjective similarity.

King¹,

Jones²,

Pearlman³

et al. 2002

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5, for a review). The positive trans-fer of discrimination learning is associated with a decrease in the perceived similarity of the discriminated stimuli according to the poor-per-foTmemce-on-different-stimuli measure (King, Shanks, & Hart, 1996). It has been shown that the elderly discriminate poorly and also perceive discriminated stimuli as similar according to the same measure (Scialfa & Thomas, 1994).…”

Section: Opposing Effects On Identificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grouping and Assimilation in Perception, Memory, and Conditioning

King

2001

Review of General Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A group-assimilation theory hypothesizes that a Gestalt-like group is associated with assimilation among the parts of the group. Assimilation is an increase in the perceived or sensed similarity of 1 part to a 2nd part. Assimilation occurs for traditional parts such as color but also occurs for salience. The theory accounts for key outcomes in perception, memory, and conditioning. An important hypothesis is that traditional assimilation and salience assimilation tend to have opposing effects on identification. The traditional assimilation of a target to a 2nd part frequently impairs the target's identification. In contrast, the assimilation of a less salient target to a more salient 2nd part increases the salience of the target and thus improves the target's identification. The corresponding hypothesis that 2 groups are associated with contrast between those parts that belong to different groups is also considered.

show abstract

“…Further, the positive transfer of discrimination learning may be due to a decrease in perceived similarity (Hall, 1991, Ch. 6;King, Shanks, & Hart, 1996). Yet categorical perception, the association of stimuli with dissimilar objects, and positive transfer have hardly been related to the Weber fraction and judgment outcomes (cf.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Weber Fraction versus Perceived Similarity

1999

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Weber fraction type of discrimination outcome means that stimuli of high magnitude are difficult to discriminate. Simultaneous and successive discriminations between two long (high magnitude) lines and also between two short (low magnitude) lines were carried out. Over-all performance on the successive discrimination between the two long lines was much poorer than on the three other discriminations. This discrimination also produced the poorest performance on different stimuli relative to same stimuli. The latter result should indicate that the two successive long lines were perceived as most similar. These and additional results support the conclusion that over-all discrimination performance and perceived similarity were consistently associated even though they were not consistently associated with length and time of occurrence (simultaneous versus successive). Nevertheless, the association of discrimination with perceived similarity has received minimal attention in the psychophysics area.

show abstract

Discrimination learning decreases perceived similarity according to an objective measure

Cited by 6 publications

References 39 publications

The length of the retention interval, forgetting, and subjective similarity.

The length of the retention interval, forgetting, and subjective similarity.

Grouping and Assimilation in Perception, Memory, and Conditioning

The Weber Fraction versus Perceived Similarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About