scholarly journals What is typical about the typicality effect in category-based induction?

2010 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. Rein ◽  
M. B. Goldwater ◽  
A. B. Markman
Keyword(s):  
Typicality Effect

scholarly journals Now you see it, now you don’t: dynamism amplifies the typicality effect

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Clewley ◽  
Jim Nixon
Keyword(s):  
Human Performance ◽  
Pilot Training ◽  
Aircraft Accidents ◽  
Airline Pilots ◽  
System Transition ◽  
Typical Event ◽  
Typicality Effect ◽  
Recognition And Response ◽  
Event Dynamics ◽  
Response Errors

AbstractSome safety events do not stabilise in a coherent state, presenting with transient or intermittent features. Such dynamism may pose problems for human performance, especially if combined with non-typical stimuli that are rarely encountered in everyday work. This may explain undesirable pilot behaviour and could be an important cognitive factor in recent aircraft accidents. Sixty-five airline pilots tested a real-world typicality gradient, composed of two cockpit events, a typical event, and a non-typical event, across two different forms of dynamism, a stable, single system transition, and an unstable, intermittent system transition. We found that non-typical event stimuli elicited a greater number of response errors and incurred an increased response latency when compared to typical event stimuli, replicating the typicality effect. These performance deteriorations were amplified when a form of unstable system dynamism was introduced. Typical stimuli were unaffected by dynamism. This indicates that dynamic, non-typical events are problematic for pilots and may lead to poor event recognition and response. Typical is advantageous, even if dynamic. Manufacturers and airlines should evolve pilot training and crew procedures to take account of variety in event dynamics.

Effects of Chinese word structure on object categorization in Chinese–English bilinguals

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 468-500
Author(s):  
XUAN PAN ◽  
DEBRA JARED
Keyword(s):  
English Word ◽  
Object Categorization ◽  
Chinese Word ◽  
Linguistic Information ◽  
Word Structure ◽  
Category Information ◽  
Verbal Labels ◽  
Typicality Effect

ABSTRACTWe investigated how verbal labels affect object categorization in bilinguals. In English, most nouns do not provide linguistic clues to their categories (an exception is sunflower), whereas in Chinese, some nouns provide category information morphologically (e.g., 鸵鸟- ostrich and 知更鸟- robin have the morpheme鸟- bird in their Chinese names), while some nouns do not (e.g., 企鹅- penguin and 鸽子- pigeon). We examined the effect of Chinese word structure on bilinguals’ categorization processes in two ERP experiments. Chinese–English bilinguals and English monolinguals judged the membership of atypical (e.g., ostrich, penguin) vs. typical (e.g., robin, pigeon) pictorial (Experiment 1) and English word (Experiment 2) exemplars of categories (e.g., bird). English monolinguals showed typicality effects in RT data, and in the N300 and N400 of ERP data, regardless of whether the object name had a category cue in Chinese. In contrast, Chinese–English bilinguals showed a larger typicality effect for objects without category cues in their name than objects with cues, even when they were tested in English. These results demonstrate that linguistic information in bilinguals’ L1 has an effect on their L2 categorization processes. The findings are explained using the label-feedback hypothesis.

scholarly journals Processing Verb Meanings and the Declarative/Procedural Model: A Developmental Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Stefaniak ◽  
Véronique Baltazart ◽  
Christelle Declercq
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Development ◽  
Declarative Memory ◽  
Procedural Memory ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Memory System ◽  
Developmental Study ◽  
Sequential Processing ◽  
Grammaticality Judgments ◽  
Typicality Effect ◽  
Verb Processing

According to the Declarative/Procedural Model, the lexicon depends on declarative memory while grammar relies on procedural memory. Furthermore, procedural memory underlies the sequential processing of language. Thus, this system is important for predicting the next item in a sentence. Verb processing represents a good candidate to test this assumption. Semantic representations of verbs include information about the protagonists in the situations they refer to. This semantic knowledge is acquired implicitly and used during verb processing, such that the processing of a verb preactivates its typical patients (e.g., the window for break). Thus, determining how the patient typicality effect appears during children’s cognitive development could provide evidence about the memory system that is dedicated to this effect. Two studies are presented in which French children aged 6–10 and adults made grammaticality judgments on 80 auditorily presented sentences. In Experiment 1, the verb was followed by a typical patient or by a less typical patient. In Experiment 2, grammatical sentences were constructed such that the verb was followed either by a typical patient or by a noun that could not be a patient of that verb. The typicality effect occurs in younger children and is interpreted in terms of developmental invariance. We suggest that this effect may depend on procedural memory, in line with studies that showed that meaning is necessary to allow procedural memory to learn the sequence of words in a sentence.

Typicality Effect on Learning

2012 ◽  
pp. 3357-3359
Author(s):  
Erin Jones Higgins ◽  
Brian H. Ross
Keyword(s):  
Typicality Effect

scholarly journals Categorization Method Affects the Typicality Effect: ERP Evidence from a Category-Inference Task

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoxi Wang ◽  
Yun Tao ◽  
Tobias Tempel ◽  
Yuan Xu ◽  
Siqi Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Typicality Effect ◽  
Inference Task

scholarly journals Typicality effect on category clustering.

1984 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 221-227
Author(s):  
Akiko Ishige ◽  
Yuzi Hakoda
Keyword(s):  
Typicality Effect

How the Camel Lost Its Hump: The Impact of Object Typicality on Event-related Potential Signals in Object Decision

2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 1338-1353 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. Hauk ◽  
K. Patterson ◽  
A. Woollams ◽  
E. Cooper-Pye ◽  
F. Pulvermüller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Event Related Potentials ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
Cortical Activation ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Typical Structure ◽  
Object Decision ◽  
Related Potentials ◽  
Typicality Effect ◽  
The Impact

Using an object decision task, event-related potentials (ERPs), and minimum norm current source estimates, we investigated early spatiotemporal aspects of cortical activation elicited by line drawings that were manipulated on two dimensions: authenticity and typicality. Authentic objects were those that match real-world experience, whereas nonauthentic objects were “doctored” by deletion or addition of features (e.g., a camel with its hump removed, a hammer with two handles). The main manipulation of interest for both authentic and nonauthentic objects was the degree of typicality in the object's structure: typical items are composed of parts that have tended to co-occur across many different objects in the perceiver's experience. The ERP pattern revealed a significant typicality effect at 116 msec after stimulus onset. Both atypical authentic objects (e.g., a camel with its hump) and atypical nonauthentic objects (e.g., a jackal with a hump) elicited stronger brain activation than did objects with typical structure. A significant effect of authenticity was observed at 480 msec, with stronger activation for the nonauthentic objects. The factors of typicality and authenticity interacted at 160 and 330 msec. The most prominent source of the typicality effect was the bilateral occipitotemporal cortex, whereas the interaction and the authenticity effects were mainly observed in the more anterior bilateral temporal cortex. These findings support the hypothesis that within the first few hundred milliseconds after stimulus presentation onset, visual-form-related perceptual and conceptual processes represent distinct but interacting stages in object recognition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document