Presentation Order Effects on Category Learning and Category Generalization

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabien Mathy ◽  
Jacob Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Category Learning ◽  
Presentation Order ◽  
Order Effects

Feedback versus an Illusion in Time

Perception ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald G Jamieson ◽  
William M Petrusic
Keyword(s):  
Presentation Order ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Information Feedback ◽  
Response Accuracy ◽  
Time Order ◽  
Extended Practice ◽  
Duration Comparison ◽  
Response Biases

The accuracy of many perceptual comparisons depends greatly on the order in which the to-be-compared stimuli are presented. With comparisons of durations around 300 ms, these presentation-order effects do not diminish, even with extended practice, when feedback about response accuracy is withheld. Providing such feedback greatly diminishes presentation-order effects and coincidentally produces substantial increases in response accuracy. The feedback acts in part through inducing response biases and in part through changes in sensitivity. The contradiction between studies which report time-order errors in duration comparison and those which do not is attributable to differences in the use of information feedback.

Developmental Changes in the Perception of Inverted Triangular Forms: Closure and Order Effects

1971 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 587-592
Author(s):  
W. F. Landers ◽  
D. C. Cogan ◽  
R. R. Hart
Keyword(s):  
Presentation Order ◽  
Developmental Changes ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
School Age ◽  
Perceptual Development ◽  
Random Presentation ◽  
Reliable Interaction

90 preschool and school age children were required to judge the orientation of simple triangular forms of varying completeness presented in one of three orders: increasing completeness, decreasing completeness, and random. Results indicated that number of correct responses varied as a function of age, degree of closure, and presentation order. A reliable interaction between age and presentation order indicated that the random presentation order was more difficult for the younger children. These results were taken as substantial support for the perceptual development viewpoint typified by Gibson, Hebb, and Piaget.

scholarly journals Presentation-order effects for aesthetic stimulus preference

2012 ◽  
Vol 74 (7) ◽  
pp. 1499-1511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mats P. Englund ◽  
Åke Hellström
Keyword(s):  
Presentation Order ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Stimulus Preference

scholarly journals The Influence of Presentation Order on Category Transfer

2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabien Mathy ◽  
Jacob Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Associative Learning ◽  
Category Learning ◽  
Presentation Order ◽  
Category Structure ◽  
Training Condition ◽  
Rule Based ◽  
Category Knowledge ◽  
Training Examples ◽  
Logical Rules

Abstract. This study of supervised categorization shows how different kinds of category representations are influenced by the order in which training examples are presented. We used the well-studied 5-4 category structure of Medin and Schaffer (1978) , which allows transfer of category learning to new stimuli to be discriminated as a function of rule-based or similarity-based category knowledge. In the rule-based training condition (thought to facilitate the learning of abstract logical rules and hypothesized to produce rule-based classification), items were grouped by subcategories and randomized within each subcategory. In the similarity-based training condition (thought to facilitate associative learning and hypothesized to produce exemplar classification), transitions between items within the same category were determined by their featural similarity and subcategories were ignored. We found that transfer patterns depended on whether the presentation order was similarity-based, or rule-based, with the participants particularly capitalizing on the rule-based order.

Category Ratings of Visual Velocity Support Haubensak's Consistency Model

Perception ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 25 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 42-42
Author(s):  
W H Ehrenstein ◽  
A N Sokolov
Keyword(s):  
Computer Simulation ◽  
Human Perception ◽  
Presentation Order ◽  
Skewed Distribution ◽  
Frequency Effect ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Equal Frequency ◽  
Underlying Assumption ◽  
Consistency Model ◽  
Good Agreement

Identical stimuli receive higher category ratings when presented in a positively skewed distribution (smaller stimuli occur more often than larger) and lower ratings in a negatively-skewed distribution (larger stimuli occur more often). This frequency effect has been explained by a tendency to assign the same categories to the same stimuli (‘consistency model’ by Haubensak, 1992 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance18 303) rather than by a tendency to assign the same number of stimuli to each category. The consistency model postulates the prime importance of stimuli that occur early in a sequence, with the underlying assumption that more frequent stimuli have higher probability of occurring earlier. Thus, presentation order rather than frequency of stimuli might be decisive. We asked whether a ‘frequency’ effect would still obtain when stimuli are in fact presented with equal frequency, but in a sequence derived from positively or negatively skewed source samples. Ratings of visual velocity were obtained for a dot that started to move at 0.5 deg below fixation in leftward or rightward direction for 2, 2.5, or 3 deg. Five velocities (3.0, 4.5, 6.0, 7.5, 9.0 deg s−1) were presented 10 times each (in a balanced combination of stimulus duration and displacement) and were rated by 32 subjects using three categories (slow, medium, fast). Our results clearly support Haubensak's model: identical velocities were rated higher/lower in presentation sequences that mimicked the order effects of positive/negative skewing, respectively. Moreover, computer simulation of the Haubensak model reveals good agreement between predicted and observed results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document