Modeling Cross-Cultural Performance on the Visual Oddity Task

  • Andrew Lovett
  • Kate Lockwood
  • Kenneth Forbus
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5248)

Abstract

Cognitive simulation offers a means of more closely examining the reasons for behavior found in psychological studies. This paper describes a computational model of the visual oddity task, in which individuals are shown six images and asked to pick the one that doesn’t belong. We show that the model can match performance by participants from two cultures: Americans and the Mundurukú. We use ablation experiments on the model to provide evidence as to what factors might help explain differences in performance by the members of the two cultures.

Keywords

Qualitative representation analogy cognitive modeling oddity task 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abravanel, E.: The Figure Simplicity of Parallel Lines. Child Development 48(2), 708–710 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Appelle, S.: Perception and Discrimination as a Function of Stimulus Orientation: The Oblique Effect in Man and Animal. Psychological Bulletin 78, 266–278 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bhatt, R., Hayden, A., Reed, A., Bertin, E., Joseph, J.: Infants’ Perception of Information along Object Boundaries: Concavities versus Convexities. Experimental Child Psychology 94, 91–113 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biederman, I.: Recognition-by-Components: A Theory of Human Image Understanding. Psychological Review 94, 115–147 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Croft, D., Thagard, P.: Dynamic Imagery: A Computational Model of Motion and Visual Analogy. In: Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. (eds.) Model-based Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values, pp. 259–274. Kluwer/Plenum (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davies, J., Goel, A.K.: Visual Analogy in Problem Solving. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 377–382 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dehaene, S., Izard, V., Pica, P., Spelke, E.: Core Knowledge of Geometry in an Amazonian Indigene Group. Science 311, 381–384 (2006)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., Gentner, D.: The Structure-Mapping Engine. In: Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1986)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferguson, R.W.: MAGI: Analogy-Based Encoding Using Regularity and Symmetry. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 283–288 (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Forbus, K., Oblinger, D.: Making SME Greedy and Pragmatic. In: Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Forbus, K., Ferguson, R., Usher, J.: Towards a Computational Model of Sketching. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI-2001) (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Forbus, K., Lockwood, K., Klenk, M., Tomai, E., Usher, J.: Open-Domain Sketch Understanding: The nuSketch Approach. In: AAAI Fall Symposium on Making Pen-based Interaction Intelligent and Natural (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Forbus, K., Usher, J., Lovett, A., Wetzel, J.: CogSketch: Open-Domain Sketch Understanding for Cognitive Science Research and for Education. In: Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop on Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gentner, D.: Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy. Cognitive Science 7(2), 155–170 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gentner, D., Markman, A.B.: Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity. American Psychologist 52, 42–56 (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J.: Relational Language and Relational Thought. In: Amsel, E., Byrnes, J.P. (eds.) Language, Literacy, and Cognitive Development: The Development and Consequences of Symbolic Communication. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L.V., Duncan, S.: Categories and Particulars: Prototype Effects in Estimating Location. Psychological Review 98(3), 352–376 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kuehne, S., Forbus, K., Gentner, D., Quinn, B.: SEQL: Category Learning as Progressive Abstraction Using Structure Mapping. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lovett, A., Gentner, D., Forbus, K.: Simulating Time-Course Phenomena in Perceptual Similarity via Incremental Encoding. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lovett, A., Forbus, K., Usher, J.: Analogy with Qualitative Spatial Representations Can Simulate Solving Raven’s Progressive Matrices. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Society (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lovett, A., Sagi, E., Gentner, D.: Analogy as a Mechanism for Comparison. In: Proceedings of Analogies: Integrating Multiple Cognitive Abilities (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Markman, A.B., Gentner, D.: Commonalities and Differences in Similarity Comparisons. Memory & Cognition 24(2), 235–249 (1996)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mitchell, M.: Analogy-making as Perception: A Computer Model. MIT Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Palmer, S.E.: Hierarchical Structure in Perceptual Representation. Cognitive Psychology 9(4), 441–474 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tomai, E., Lovett, A., Forbus, K., Usher, J.: A Structure Mapping Model for Solving Geometric Analogy Problems. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wertheimer, M.: Gestalt Theory. In: Ellis, W.D. (ed.) A Sourcebook of Gestalt Psychology, pp. 1–11. The Humanities Press, New York (1924/1950)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrew Lovett
    • 1
  • Kate Lockwood
    • 1
  • Kenneth Forbus
    • 1
  1. 1.Qualitative Reasoning GroupNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations