Abstract
Kahana and Sekuler (2002) conducted short-term perceptual recognition experiments and modeled the data with a noisy exemplar similarity model. They found model-based evidence that list homogeneity (i.e., the degree to which exemplars on a study list are similar to one another) exerted a significant impact on recognition performance—a finding that is not predicted by standard global familiarity models. A potential limitation of their experiments is that they tested complex stimuli in which psychological similarities among exemplars may have been misspecified. Also, the relative importance of list homogeneity was not compared with that of alternative forms of parametric variation in the model. We conducted conceptual replications of their experiments, using a simpler set of stimuli in which interexemplar similarities could be more precisely measured. Extensive model-based comparisons reveal, in accord with the results of Kahana and Sekuler, strong evidence for a role of list homogeneity onold-new recognition performance. We suggest that subjects systematically adjust their response criteria on the basis of the homogeneity of the study list items.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ashby, F. G., &Townsend, J. T. (1986). Varieties of perceptual independence.Psychological Review,93, 154–179.
Busey, T. A., &Tunnicliff, J. L. (1999). Accounts of blending, distinctiveness, and typicality in the false recognition of faces.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 1210–1235.
Cohen, A. L., Nosofsky, R. M., &Zaki, S. R. (2001). Category variability, exemplar similarity, and perceptual classification.Memory & Cognition,29, 1165–1175.
Ennis, D. M. (1992). Modeling similarity and identification when there are momentary fluctuations in psychological magnitudes. In F. G. Ashby (Ed.),Multidimensional models of perception and cognition (pp. 279–298). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gillund, G., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.Psychological Review,91, 1–67.
Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model.Psychological Review,95, 528–551.
Kahana, M. J., &Sekuler, R. (2002). Recognizing spatial patterns: A noisy exemplar approach.Vision Research,42, 2177–2192.
Lamberts, K., Brockdorff, N., &Heit, E. (2003). Feature-sampling and random-walk models of individual-stimulus recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,132, 351–378.
Lockhead, G. R. (1972). Processing dimensional stimuli: A note.Psychological Review,79, 410–419.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 39–57.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1988). Exemplar-based accounts of relations between classification, recognition, and typicality.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 700–708.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1991). Tests of an exemplar model for relating perceptual classification and recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 3–27.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1997). An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded categorization and absolute judgment. In A. A. J. Marley (Ed.),Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce (pp. 347–366). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rips, L. J. (1989). Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 21–59). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shepard, R. N. (1962). The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function.Part I. Psychometrika,27, 125–140.
Shepard, R. N. (1987). Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science.Science,237, 1317–1323.
Shin, H. J., &Nosofsky, R. M. (1992). Similarity-scaling studies of dot-pattern classification and recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,121, 278–304.
Smith, E. E., &Sloman, S. A. (1994). Similarity- versus rule-based categorization.Memory & Cognition,22, 377–386.
Sternberg, S. (1966). High-speed scanning in human memory.Science,153, 652–654.
Stewart, N., &Chater, N. (2002). The effect of category variability in perceptual categorization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 893–907.
Zaki, S. R., &Nosofsky, R. M. (2001). Exemplar accounts of blending and distinctiveness effects in perceptual old-new recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 1022–1041.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant R01 MH48494.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nosofsky, R.M., Kantner, J. Exemplar similarity, study list homogeneity, and short-term perceptual recognition. Memory & Cognition 34, 112–124 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193391
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193391