Biomedical subjects

Pia Wennerholm

Publications and source records attributed to Pia Wennerholm.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Evidence for rule-based processes in the inverse base-rate effect.

Three studies provide convergent evidence that the inverse base-rate effect (Medin & Edelson, 1988) is mediated by rule-based cognitive processes. Experiment 1 shows that, in contrast to adults, prior to the formal operational stage most children do not exhibit the inverse base-rate effect. Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrate that an adult sample is a mix of participants relying on associative processes who categorize according to the base-rate and participants relying on rule-based processes who exhibit a strong inverse base-rate effect. The distribution of the effect is bimodal, and removing participants independently classified as prone to rule-based processing effectively eliminates the inverse base-rate effect. The implications for current explanations of the inverse base-rate effect are discussed.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Exemplars, prototypes, and the flexibility of classification models.

J. P. Minda and J. D. Smith (2001) showed that a prototype model outperforms an exemplar model, especially in larger categories or categories that contained more complex stimuli. R. M. Nosofsky and S. R. Zaki (2002) showed that an exemplar model with a response-scaling mechanism outperforms a prototype model. The authors of the current study investigated whether excessive model flexibility could explain these results. Using cross-validation, the authors demonstrated that both the prototype model and the exemplar model with a response-scaling mechanism suffered from overfilling in the linearly separable category structure. The results illustrate the need to make sure that the best-fitting model is not chasing error variance instead of variance attributed to the cognitive process it is supposed to model.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Can attentional theory explain the inverse base rate effect? Comment on Kruschke (2001).

In J. K. Kruschke's (2001; see record 2001-18940-005) study, it is argued that attentional theory is the sole satisfactory explanation of the inverse base rate effect and that eliminative inference (P. Juslin, P. Wennerholm, & A. Winman, 2001; see record 2001-07828-016) plays no role in the phenomenon. In this comment, the authors demonstrate that, in contrast to the central tenets of attentional theory, (a) rapid attention shifts as implemented in ADIT decelerate learning in the inverse base-rate task and (b) the claim that the inverse base-rate effect is directly caused by an attentional asymmetry is refuted by data. It is proposed that a complete account of the inverse base-rate effect needs to integrate attention effects with inference rules that are flexibly used for both induction and elimination.

Association Learning↗