Abstract
Concepts are interrelated to the extent that the characterization of each concept is influenced by the other concepts, and are isolated to the extent that the characterization of one concept is independent of other concepts. The relative categorization accuracy of the prototype and caricature of a concept can be used as a measure of concept interrelatedness. The prototype is the central tendency of a concept, whereas a caricature deviates from the concept’s central tendency in the direction opposite the central tendency of other acquired concepts. The prototype is predicted to be relatively well categorized when a concept is relatively independent of other concepts, but the caricature is predicted to be relatively well categorized when a concept is highly related to other concepts. Support for these predictions comes from manipulations of the labels given to simultaneously acquired concepts (Experiment 1) and of the order of categories during learning (Experiment 2).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ashby, F. G., &Maddox, W. T. (1993). Relations among prototype,exemplar, and decision bound models of categorization.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,38, 423–466.
Barr, R. A., &Caplan, L. J. (1987). Category representations and their implications for category structure.Memory & Cognition,15, 397–418.
Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,22, 577–660.
Beale, J. M., &Keil, F. C. (1995). Categorical effects in the perception of faces.Cognition,57, 217–239.
Bentin, S., Sagiv, N., Mecklinger, A., Friederici, A., &von Cramon, Y. D. (2002). Priming visual face-processing mechanisms: Electrophysiological evidence.Psychological Science,13, 190–193.
Block, N. (1999). Functional role semantics. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (Eds.),MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences (pp. 331–332). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Burgess, C., Livesay, K., &Lund, K. (1998). Explorations in context space: Words, sentences, and discourse.Discourse Processes,25, 211–257.
Burgess, C., &Lund, K. (2000). The dynamics of meaning in memory. In E. Diettrich & A. B. Markman (Eds.),Cognitive dynamics: Conceptual change in humans and machines (pp. 117–156). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Busey, T. A. (1998). Physical and psychological representations of faces: Evidence from morphing.Psychological Science,9, 476–483.
Clark, E. V. (1990). On the pragmatics of contrast.Journal of Child Language,17, 417–431.
Collins, A. M., &Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,8, 240–247.
Corneille, O., &Judd, C. M. (1999). Accentuation and sensitization effects in the categorization of multifaceted stimuli.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,77, 927–941.
Edelman, S. (1999).Representation and recognition in vision. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Field, H. (1977). Logic, meaning, and conceptual role.Journal of Philosophy,74, 379–409.
Galton, F. J. (1878). Composite portraits.Nature,18, 97–100.
Gauthier, I., &Tarr, M. J. (2002). Unraveling mechanisms for expert object recognition: Bridging brain activity and behavior.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 431–446.
Goldstone, R. L. (1996). Isolated and interrelated concepts.Memory & Cognition,24, 608–628.
Goldstone, R. L., &Barsalou, L. (1998). Reuniting perception and conception.Cognition,65, 231–262.
Goldstone, R. L., &Rogosky, B. J. (2002). Using relations within conceptual systems to translate across conceptual systems.Cognition,84, 295–320.
Goldstone, R. L., &Stevyers, M. (2001). The sensitization and differentiation of dimensions during category learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 116–139.
Harnad, S. (Ed.) (1987).Categorical perception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem.Physica D, 42, 335–346.
Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., &Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup bias.Annual Review of Psychology,53, 575–604.
Hume, D. (1973).A treatise of human nature: Being an attempt to introduce the experimental method of reasoning into moral subjects. London: Thomas Longman. (Original work published 1740)
Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., &Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception.Journal of Neuroscience,17, 4302–4311.
Kayser, A. (1997).Heads. New York: Abbeville Press.
Krueger, J., &Rothbart, M. (1990). Contrast and accentuation effects in category learning.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,59, 651–663.
Kruschke, J. K. (1996). Base rates in category learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 3–26.
Lakoff, G. (1987).Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Landauer, T. K., &Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of the acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge.Psychological Review,104, 211–240.
Lenat, D. B., &Feigenbaum, E. A. (1991). On the thresholds of knowledge.Artificial Intelligence,47, 185–250.
Levin, D. T., &Angelone, B. L. (2002). Categorical perception of race.Perception,31, 567–578.
Levin, D. T., &Beale, J. M. (2000). Categorical perception occurs in newly learned faces, other-race faces, and inverted faces.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 386–401.
Linville, P. W., &Jones, E. E. (1980). Polarized appraisals of out-group members.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,38, 689–703.
Malt, B. C., Sloman, S. A., Gennari, S., Shi, M., &Wang, Y. (1999). Knowing versus naming: Similarity and the linguistic classification of artifacts.Journal of Memory & Language,40, 230–262.
Markman, E. M. (1990). Constraints children place on word meanings.Cognitive Science,14, 57–77.
Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., &Mondloch, C. J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,6, 255–260.
McCarthy, G., Puce, A., Gore, J. C., &Allison, T. (1997). Facespecific processing in the human fusiform gyrus.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,9, 605–610.
McConnell, A. R., Sherman, S. J., &Hamilton, D. L. (1994). Illusory correlation in the perception of groups: An extension of the distinctiveness-based account.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,67, 414–429.
McKenzie, C. R. M. (1998). Taking into account the strength of an alternative hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 771–792.
McKenzie, C. R. M. (1999). (Non)Complementary updating of belief in two hypotheses.Memory & Cognition,27, 152–165.
McKone, E., Martini, P., &Nakayama, K. (2001). Categorical perception of face identity in noise isolates configural processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 573–599.
McLaren, I. P. L., Bennett, C. H., Guttman-Nahir, T., &Kim, K. (1995). Prototype effects and peak shift in categorization.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 662–673.
Medin, D. L., &Schaffer, M. M. (1978). A context theory of classification learning.Psychological Review,85, 207–238.
Niedenthal, P. M., &Beike, D. R. (1997). Interrelated and isolated self-concepts.Personality & Social Psychology Review,1, 106–128.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1986). Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 39–57.
Nosofsky, R. M. (1991). Typicality in logically defined categories: Exemplar-similarity versus rule instantiation.Memory & Cognition,19, 131–150.
Palmeri, T. J., &Nosofsky, R. M. (2001). Central tendencies, extreme points, and prototype enhancement effects in ill-defined perceptual categorization.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology,54A, 197–235.
Posner, M. I., &Keele, S. W. (1968). On the genesis of abstract ideas.Journal of Experimental Psychology,77, 353–363.
Quillian, M. R. (1967). Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities.Behavioral Science,12, 410–430.
Reed, S. K. (1972). Pattern recognition and categorization.Cognitive Psychology,3, 382–407.
Rhodes, G., Brennan, S., &Carey, S. (1987). Identification and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces.Cognitive Psychology,19, 473–497.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,1, 303–322.
Saussure, F. de (1959).Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill. (Original work published 1915)
Solomon, K. O., &Barsalou, L. W. (2001). Representing properties locally.Cognitive Psychology,43, 129–169.
Spence, K. W. (1936). The nature of discrimination learning in animals.Psychological Review,43, 427–429.
Steyvers, M. (1999). Morphing techniques for manipulating face images.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,31, 359–369.
Stich, S. P. (1983).From folk psychology to cognitive science: The case against belief. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tanaka, J. W., &Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,46A, 225–245.
Van Wallendael, L. R., &Hastie, R. (1990). Tracing the footsteps of Sherlock Holmes: Cognitive representations of hypothesis testing.Memory & Cognition,18, 240–250.
Waxman, S. R. (1990). Linguistic biases and the establishment of conceptual hierarchies: Evidence from preschool children.Cognitive Development,5, 123–150.
Waxman, S. R., Chambers, D. W., Yntema, D. B., &Gelman, R. (1989). Complementary versus contrastive classification in preschool children.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,48, 410–422.
Wisniewski, E. J., &Medin, D. L. (1994). On the interaction of theory and data in concept learning.Cognitive Science,18, 221–281.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was funded by NIH Grant MH56871 and NSF Grant 0125287.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goldstone, R.L., Steyvers, M. & Rogosky, B.J. Conceptual interrelatedness and caricatures. Memory & Cognition 31, 169–180 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194377
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194377