1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Science
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 類別結構的亂度因素、刺激向度個數對分類學習行為的影響
Categorical entropy, number of stimulus dimensions, and category learning
作者 林家源
Lin, Chia Yuan
貢獻者 楊立行
Yang, Lee Xieng
林家源
Lin, Chia Yuan
關鍵詞 類別學習
向度數目
類別結構的亂度因素
category learning
materials dimensionality
categorical entropy
日期 2011
上傳時間 30-Oct-2012 11:27:22 (UTC+8)
摘要 Sloutsky (2010; Kloos與Sloutsky, 2008) 操弄不同的類別結構亂度 (categorical entropy) 進行類別學習作業，藉此提出了雙系統理論，認為人們會啟動不同的系統，濃縮式系統 (compression-based system)或選擇式系統 (selection-based system)，以適應不同的類別結構組成之刺激材料。本研究回顧了Sloutsky的研究證據與過去類別學習領域的相關文獻，認為此雙系統理論可能只適用在向度數目較多的情境之下，因此設計了三個實驗，使用和Kloos與Sloutsky (2008) 相同的實驗派典，欲說明刺激材料的向度個數確實會影響到人們的類別學習行為。實驗一發現，Sloutsky所預測的類別結構與學習方式之交互作用只出現在向度個數較多的情境，向度個數少時則無此交互作用。實驗二得到與實驗一相同的結果，並排除了刺激材料本身特性（幾何圖形或類自然類別材料）此一混淆變項。實驗三採用特別設計的依變項，直接觀察受試者採用相似性(similarity)或規則(rule)的方式進行分類判斷，集群分析的結果顯示在向度數目少的情境時，不管何種類別結構受試者均傾向使用以規則為基礎的選擇式系統學習。因此，綜合以上發現，本研究認為Sloutsky的雙系統理論必須考慮到向度數目此一變項，才能更廣泛的應用於各種類別學習情境之中。
The goal of this research is to point out that the dimensions of experimental materials can influence human category learning, which is neglected by traditional models of category learning. Three experiments in this research examined the effect of stimuli complexity by following the paradigms of Kloos and Sloutsky (2008). In Experiment 1, the prediction of Sloutsky’s theory (2010) on the interaction effect between category structures and learning conditions succeeds only at high complexity of materials, but fails in the low complexity condition. Experiment 2 was conducted by the same experimental setting as Experiment 1, but the natural-like stimuli were replaced by well-defined artificial geometrics. The result of Experiment 2 is the same as Experiment 1, suggesting that the complexity of materials plays a critical role in category learning no matter what kind of stimuli are used. Experiment 3 found that various materials complexity had distinct effects on human category representations. Namely, when experimental stimuli are relatively complex, people would use the corresponding category learning system to represent stimuli to learn dense categories or sparse ones. In contrast, when the stimuli are relatively simple, participants would represent the stimuli in a rule-based manner both in dense and sparse category structures.
參考文獻 Alfonso-Reese, L. A., Ashby, F. G., and Brainard, D. H. (2002). What makes a categorization task difficult? Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 570-583.
Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, J. R., & Betz, J. (2001). A hybrid model of categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 629–647.
Ashby, F. G., Alfonso-Reese, L. A., Turken, A. U., & Waldron, E. M. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. Psychological Review, 105, 442-481.
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.
Ashby, F. G., & Maddox, W. T. (2005). Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149-178.
Ashby, F. G., Maddox, W. T., Bohil, C. J. (2002). Observational versus feedback training in rule-based and information-integration category learning. Memory & Cognition, 30, 666-677.
Ashby, F. G., Queller, S., and Berretty, P. M. (1999). On the dominance of unidimensional rules in unsupervised categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1178-1199.
Bar-Gad, I., Morris, G., & Bergman, H. (2003). Information processing, dimensionality reduction and reinforcement learning in the basal ganglia. Progress in Neurobiology, 71, 439–473.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
Cincotta, C. M., & Seger, C. A. (2007). Dissociation between striatal regions while learning to categorize via feedback and via observation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 249-265.
Cohen, J. D., Botvinick, M. M., & Carter, C. S. (2000). Anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex: Who’s in control? Nature Neuroscience, 3, 421-423.
Cohen, J. D., Perlstein, W. M., Braver, T. S., Nystrom, L. E., Noll, D., C., Jonides, J., & Smith, E., E. (1997). Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task. Nature, 386, 604-608.
Colreavy, E. & Lewandowsky, S. (2008). Strategy development and learning differences in supervised and unsupervised categorization. Memory & Cognition, 36, 762-755.
D`Esposito, M., Postle, B. R., Ballard, D., & Lease, J. (1999). Maintenance versus manipulation of information held in working memory: An event related fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 41, 66-86.
Erickson, M. A., & Kruschke, J. K. (1998). Rules and exemplars in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 107-140.
Homa, D., & Chambliss, D. (1975). The relative contributions of common and distinctive information on the abstraction from ill-defined categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1, 351-359.
Kruschke, J. K. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. Psychological Review, 99, 22-44.
Kruschke, J. K. (1993). Human category learning: Implications for backpropagation Models. Connection Science, 5, 3-36.
Kloos H., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2008). What’s behind different kinds of kinds: Effects of statistical density on learning and representation of categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 52-72.
Livingstion, K. R., Andrews, J. K., & Harnad, S. (1998). Categorical perception effects induced by category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24, 732-753.
Love, B. C. (2002). Comparing supervised and unsupervised category learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 829-835.
Love, B. C. (2003). The multifaceted nature of unsupervised category learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 190-197.
Maddox, W. T. & Ashby, F. G. (1993). Comparing decision bound and exemplar models of categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 49-70.
Maddox, W. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1998). Selective attention and the formation of linear decision boundaries: Comment on McKinley and Nosofsky (1996). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 302-322.
Markman, A.B., & Makin, V.S. (1998). Referential communication and category acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 331-354.
Markman, A. B., & Ross, B., H. (2003). Category use and category learning. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 592-613.
Martin, R. C., & Caramazza, A. (1980). Classification in well-defined and ill-defined categories evidence for common processing strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 320-353.
McCloskey, M. E. & Glucksberg, S. (1978). Natural categories: Well defined or fuzzy sets? Memory & Cognition, 6, 462-472.
McKinley, S. C., & Nosofsky, R. M. (1995). Investigations of exemplar and decision bound models in large, ill-defined category structures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 128-148.
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.
Medin, D. L., & Edelson, S. M. (1988). Problem structure and the use of base-rate information from experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 68-85.
Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207-238.
Medin, D. L., & Smith, E. E. (1981). Strategies and classification learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 241-253.
Minda, J. P,. & Smith, J. D. (2001). Prototypes in category learning: The effects of category size category structure, and stimulus complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 775-799
Nomura, E. M., Maddox, W. T., Filoteo, J. V., Ing, A. D., Gitelman, D. R., Parrish, T. B., … Reber, P. J. (2007). Neural correlates of rule-based and information-integration visual category learning. Cerebral Cortex January, 17, 37-43.
Nomura, E. M., Reber, P. J. (2008). A review of medial temporal lobe and caudate contributions to visual category learning. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 279-291.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1984). Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification. Journalof Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 104-114.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39-57.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1987). Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 87-108.
Nosofsky R. M., Clark, S. E., and Shin H. J. (1989). Rules and exemplars in categorization, identification, and recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 282-304.
Nosofsky, R., M., Gluck, M., A., Palmeri, T., J., McKinley, S., C., & Glauthier, P. (1994). Comparing models of rule-based classification learning: A replication and extension of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961). Memory & Cognition, 22, 352-369.
Nosofsky, R. M., & Palmeri, T. J. (1998). A rule-plus-exception model for classifying objects in continuous-dimension spaces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 345-369.
Nosofsky, R. M., Stanton, R. D., & Zaki, S. R. (2005). Procedural interference in perceptual classification: Implicit learning or cognitive complexity? Memory & Cognition, 33, 1256-1271.
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The video toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442.
Pfefferbaum, A., Mathalon, D. H., Sullivan, E. V., Rawles, J. M., Zipursky, R. B., Lim, K. O. (1994). A quantitative magnetic resonance imaging study of changes in brain morphology from infancy to late adulthood. Archives of Neurology, 51, 874-887.
Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 328-350.
Rouder, J. N., & Ratcliff, R. (2004). Comparing categorization models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 63-82.
Rouder J. N., & Ratcliff R. (2006). Comparing exemplar- and rule-based theories of categorization. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 9-13.
Seger, C. A. (2008). How do the basal ganglia contribute to categorization? Their roles in generalization, response selection, and learning via feedback. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 265–278.
Seger, C. A., & Cincotta, C. M. (2002). Striatal activation in concept learning. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2, 149–161.
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379-423, 623-656.
Shepard R. N., Hovland, C. I., and Jenkins, H. M. (1961). Learning and memorization of classfications. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 75, 517.
Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
Sloutsky, V. M. (2003). The role of similarity in the development of categorization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 246-251.
Sloutsky, V. M. (2010). From perceptual categories to concepts: What develops? Cognitive Science, 34, 1244-1286.
Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Smith, J. D., Murray, M. J., & Minda, J. P. (1997). Straight talk about linear separability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 23, 659-680.
Sowell, E. R., Thompson, P. M., Holmes, C. J., Batth, R., Jernigan, T. L., & Toga, A. W. (1999). Localizing age-related changes in brain structure between childhood and adolescence using statistical parametric mapping. NeuroImage, 9, 587-597.
Spellman, B. A. (1993). Implicit learning of base rates. Psycoloquy, 4(61). Retrieved June 9, 2012, from the World Wide Web: http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?4.61
Stanton, R. D., & Nosofsky, R. M. (2007). Feedback interference and dissociations of classification: Evidence against the multiple-learning-systems hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1747-1758.
Verguts, T., Ameel, E., Storms, G. (2004). Measures of similarity in models of categorization. Memory & Cognition, 32, 379-389.
Wickens, T. D. (1989). Multiway contingency tables analysis for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zeithamova, D. & Maddox, W. T, (2006). Dual-task interference in perceptual category learning. Memory & Cognition, 34, 387-398.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
心理學研究所
98752001
100
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098752001
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 楊立行zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Yang, Lee Xiengen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 林家源zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lin, Chia Yuanen_US
dc.creator (作者) 林家源zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Lin, Chia Yuanen_US
dc.date (日期) 2011en_US
dc.date.accessioned 30-Oct-2012 11:27:22 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 30-Oct-2012 11:27:22 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 30-Oct-2012 11:27:22 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0098752001en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/54640-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 心理學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 98752001zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 100zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Sloutsky (2010; Kloos與Sloutsky, 2008) 操弄不同的類別結構亂度 (categorical entropy) 進行類別學習作業，藉此提出了雙系統理論，認為人們會啟動不同的系統，濃縮式系統 (compression-based system)或選擇式系統 (selection-based system)，以適應不同的類別結構組成之刺激材料。本研究回顧了Sloutsky的研究證據與過去類別學習領域的相關文獻，認為此雙系統理論可能只適用在向度數目較多的情境之下，因此設計了三個實驗，使用和Kloos與Sloutsky (2008) 相同的實驗派典，欲說明刺激材料的向度個數確實會影響到人們的類別學習行為。實驗一發現，Sloutsky所預測的類別結構與學習方式之交互作用只出現在向度個數較多的情境，向度個數少時則無此交互作用。實驗二得到與實驗一相同的結果，並排除了刺激材料本身特性（幾何圖形或類自然類別材料）此一混淆變項。實驗三採用特別設計的依變項，直接觀察受試者採用相似性(similarity)或規則(rule)的方式進行分類判斷，集群分析的結果顯示在向度數目少的情境時，不管何種類別結構受試者均傾向使用以規則為基礎的選擇式系統學習。因此，綜合以上發現，本研究認為Sloutsky的雙系統理論必須考慮到向度數目此一變項，才能更廣泛的應用於各種類別學習情境之中。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The goal of this research is to point out that the dimensions of experimental materials can influence human category learning, which is neglected by traditional models of category learning. Three experiments in this research examined the effect of stimuli complexity by following the paradigms of Kloos and Sloutsky (2008). In Experiment 1, the prediction of Sloutsky’s theory (2010) on the interaction effect between category structures and learning conditions succeeds only at high complexity of materials, but fails in the low complexity condition. Experiment 2 was conducted by the same experimental setting as Experiment 1, but the natural-like stimuli were replaced by well-defined artificial geometrics. The result of Experiment 2 is the same as Experiment 1, suggesting that the complexity of materials plays a critical role in category learning no matter what kind of stimuli are used. Experiment 3 found that various materials complexity had distinct effects on human category representations. Namely, when experimental stimuli are relatively complex, people would use the corresponding category learning system to represent stimuli to learn dense categories or sparse ones. In contrast, when the stimuli are relatively simple, participants would represent the stimuli in a rule-based manner both in dense and sparse category structures.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 中文摘要 1
Abstract 2
Literature Reviews 3
Past theories of categorization 4
Learning condition of categorization 12
Category structures 13
Sloutsky’s dual systems theory 15
Statistical density 18
Incongruent evidence with Sloustky’s dual systems theory 22
Methods 28
Experiment 1 28
Apparatus 28
Participants 29
Stimulus 29
Procedure 33
Results 34
Experiment 2 37
Participants 37
Stimulus 38
Procedure 41
Results 41
Experiment 3 44
Participants 45
Stimulus 45
Procedure 47
Results 47
General Discussions 52
Study Restrictions 53
Statistical Density 56
Multiple Systems for Category Learning 57
Dimensionality of Materials 59
Base rate of categories 61
Conclusion 62
Reference 63
Appendix 70
Examples of calculating statistical density 70		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0098752001en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 類別學習zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 向度數目zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 類別結構的亂度因素zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) category learningen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) materials dimensionalityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) categorical entropyen_US
dc.title (題名) 類別結構的亂度因素、刺激向度個數對分類學習行為的影響zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Categorical entropy, number of stimulus dimensions, and category learningen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Alfonso-Reese, L. A., Ashby, F. G., and Brainard, D. H. (2002). What makes a categorization task difficult? Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 570-583.
Anderson, J. R., & Lebiere, C. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, J. R., & Betz, J. (2001). A hybrid model of categorization. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 629–647.
Ashby, F. G., Alfonso-Reese, L. A., Turken, A. U., & Waldron, E. M. (1998). A neuropsychological theory of multiple systems in category learning. Psychological Review, 105, 442-481.
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.
Ashby, F. G., & Maddox, W. T. (2005). Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149-178.
Ashby, F. G., Maddox, W. T., Bohil, C. J. (2002). Observational versus feedback training in rule-based and information-integration category learning. Memory & Cognition, 30, 666-677.
Ashby, F. G., Queller, S., and Berretty, P. M. (1999). On the dominance of unidimensional rules in unsupervised categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1178-1199.
Bar-Gad, I., Morris, G., & Bergman, H. (2003). Information processing, dimensionality reduction and reinforcement learning in the basal ganglia. Progress in Neurobiology, 71, 439–473.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
Cincotta, C. M., & Seger, C. A. (2007). Dissociation between striatal regions while learning to categorize via feedback and via observation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 249-265.
Cohen, J. D., Botvinick, M. M., & Carter, C. S. (2000). Anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex: Who’s in control? Nature Neuroscience, 3, 421-423.
Cohen, J. D., Perlstein, W. M., Braver, T. S., Nystrom, L. E., Noll, D., C., Jonides, J., & Smith, E., E. (1997). Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task. Nature, 386, 604-608.
Colreavy, E. & Lewandowsky, S. (2008). Strategy development and learning differences in supervised and unsupervised categorization. Memory & Cognition, 36, 762-755.
D`Esposito, M., Postle, B. R., Ballard, D., & Lease, J. (1999). Maintenance versus manipulation of information held in working memory: An event related fMRI study. Brain and Cognition, 41, 66-86.
Erickson, M. A., & Kruschke, J. K. (1998). Rules and exemplars in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 107-140.
Homa, D., & Chambliss, D. (1975). The relative contributions of common and distinctive information on the abstraction from ill-defined categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1, 351-359.
Kruschke, J. K. (1992). ALCOVE: An exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. Psychological Review, 99, 22-44.
Kruschke, J. K. (1993). Human category learning: Implications for backpropagation Models. Connection Science, 5, 3-36.
Kloos H., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2008). What’s behind different kinds of kinds: Effects of statistical density on learning and representation of categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 52-72.
Livingstion, K. R., Andrews, J. K., & Harnad, S. (1998). Categorical perception effects induced by category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24, 732-753.
Love, B. C. (2002). Comparing supervised and unsupervised category learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 829-835.
Love, B. C. (2003). The multifaceted nature of unsupervised category learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 190-197.
Maddox, W. T. & Ashby, F. G. (1993). Comparing decision bound and exemplar models of categorization. Perception & Psychophysics, 53, 49-70.
Maddox, W. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1998). Selective attention and the formation of linear decision boundaries: Comment on McKinley and Nosofsky (1996). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 302-322.
Markman, A.B., & Makin, V.S. (1998). Referential communication and category acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 331-354.
Markman, A. B., & Ross, B., H. (2003). Category use and category learning. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 592-613.
Martin, R. C., & Caramazza, A. (1980). Classification in well-defined and ill-defined categories evidence for common processing strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 320-353.
McCloskey, M. E. & Glucksberg, S. (1978). Natural categories: Well defined or fuzzy sets? Memory & Cognition, 6, 462-472.
McKinley, S. C., & Nosofsky, R. M. (1995). Investigations of exemplar and decision bound models in large, ill-defined category structures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 128-148.
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.
Medin, D. L., & Edelson, S. M. (1988). Problem structure and the use of base-rate information from experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 68-85.
Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review, 85, 207-238.
Medin, D. L., & Smith, E. E. (1981). Strategies and classification learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 7, 241-253.
Minda, J. P,. & Smith, J. D. (2001). Prototypes in category learning: The effects of category size category structure, and stimulus complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 775-799
Nomura, E. M., Maddox, W. T., Filoteo, J. V., Ing, A. D., Gitelman, D. R., Parrish, T. B., … Reber, P. J. (2007). Neural correlates of rule-based and information-integration visual category learning. Cerebral Cortex January, 17, 37-43.
Nomura, E. M., Reber, P. J. (2008). A review of medial temporal lobe and caudate contributions to visual category learning. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 279-291.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1984). Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification. Journalof Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 104-114.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 39-57.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1987). Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 87-108.
Nosofsky R. M., Clark, S. E., and Shin H. J. (1989). Rules and exemplars in categorization, identification, and recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 282-304.
Nosofsky, R., M., Gluck, M., A., Palmeri, T., J., McKinley, S., C., & Glauthier, P. (1994). Comparing models of rule-based classification learning: A replication and extension of Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961). Memory & Cognition, 22, 352-369.
Nosofsky, R. M., & Palmeri, T. J. (1998). A rule-plus-exception model for classifying objects in continuous-dimension spaces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 345-369.
Nosofsky, R. M., Stanton, R. D., & Zaki, S. R. (2005). Procedural interference in perceptual classification: Implicit learning or cognitive complexity? Memory & Cognition, 33, 1256-1271.
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The video toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442.
Pfefferbaum, A., Mathalon, D. H., Sullivan, E. V., Rawles, J. M., Zipursky, R. B., Lim, K. O. (1994). A quantitative magnetic resonance imaging study of changes in brain morphology from infancy to late adulthood. Archives of Neurology, 51, 874-887.
Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 328-350.
Rouder, J. N., & Ratcliff, R. (2004). Comparing categorization models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 63-82.
Rouder J. N., & Ratcliff R. (2006). Comparing exemplar- and rule-based theories of categorization. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 9-13.
Seger, C. A. (2008). How do the basal ganglia contribute to categorization? Their roles in generalization, response selection, and learning via feedback. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 265–278.
Seger, C. A., & Cincotta, C. M. (2002). Striatal activation in concept learning. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 2, 149–161.
Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379-423, 623-656.
Shepard R. N., Hovland, C. I., and Jenkins, H. M. (1961). Learning and memorization of classfications. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 75, 517.
Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
Sloutsky, V. M. (2003). The role of similarity in the development of categorization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 246-251.
Sloutsky, V. M. (2010). From perceptual categories to concepts: What develops? Cognitive Science, 34, 1244-1286.
Smith, E. E., & Medin, D. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Smith, J. D., Murray, M. J., & Minda, J. P. (1997). Straight talk about linear separability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 23, 659-680.
Sowell, E. R., Thompson, P. M., Holmes, C. J., Batth, R., Jernigan, T. L., & Toga, A. W. (1999). Localizing age-related changes in brain structure between childhood and adolescence using statistical parametric mapping. NeuroImage, 9, 587-597.
Spellman, B. A. (1993). Implicit learning of base rates. Psycoloquy, 4(61). Retrieved June 9, 2012, from the World Wide Web: http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?4.61
Stanton, R. D., & Nosofsky, R. M. (2007). Feedback interference and dissociations of classification: Evidence against the multiple-learning-systems hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1747-1758.
Verguts, T., Ameel, E., Storms, G. (2004). Measures of similarity in models of categorization. Memory & Cognition, 32, 379-389.
Wickens, T. D. (1989). Multiway contingency tables analysis for the social sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Zeithamova, D. & Maddox, W. T, (2006). Dual-task interference in perceptual category learning. Memory & Cognition, 34, 387-398.		zh_TW