Take the 2-minute tour ×
Cognitive Sciences Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for practitioners, researchers, and students in cognitive science, psychology, neuroscience, and psychiatry. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am looking for performance results from categorization studies with discrete stimulus features and reinforcement feedback. I need something like this:

stimulus  - correct response - performance after X trials
(1,1,1,0) -         0        -   20.1% correct
(1,1,0,1) -         1        -   23.3% correct
(1,0,0,0) -         1        -   82.0% correct
...

(e.g. Shepard, Hovland & Jenkins, 1961; Medin & Schaffer, 1978)

Medin, D. L., & Schaffer, M. M. (1978). Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review; Psychological Review, 85(3), 207.
Shepard, R. N., Hovland, C. I., & Jenkins, H. M. (1961). Learning and memorization of classifications. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 75(13), 1-42.

share|improve this question
3  
can you tell us what you're trying to do? as it is, the information you're requesting is very broad (who knows how each author defines 'performance'?) and the numbers in one study most likely are not comparable to any other. –  Jeff Jan 18 '13 at 16:43
2  
Also, could you please include proper citations instead of just author and year? Also, have you already done a forward search and looked at some of the articles that cite these two? –  Artem Kaznatcheev Jan 19 '13 at 0:22
    
Jeff: i have a computational model i'm trying to validate across as many studies as possible. by 'performance' i simply mean that i want to know how often correct/incorrect responses are given (rather than neural-responses, eye-data, etc). –  vdv Jan 21 '13 at 22:32
    
Artem: added the full citations. yes, i've done a forward search. the problem is that i get too many studies that do not follow the format described above. the signal-noise ratio is too low to be useful. any help here would be appreciated. –  vdv Jan 21 '13 at 22:36
    
@vdv, please incorporate any relevant extra information in your question as well. Comments should only be seen as 'temporary'. The feedback you gave can easily be edited into your question. –  Steven Jeuris Jan 28 '13 at 10:49
add comment

2 Answers 2

You've described a very general type of study design which has probably been employed in hundreds of studies or more. Your question might profit from a more specific description of the type of study you're looking for.

A few examples that fit the bill just off the top of my head are:

Goldstone (1996) Isolated and interrelated concepts

Zaki and Homa (1999) Concepts and transformational knowledge

Kornell and Bjork (2008) Learning concepts and categories: is spacing the "enemy of induction"?

share|improve this answer
    
thank you baixiwei, i have edited my question, making it more specific. i will follow up on those references, but please let me know if the new format of the question brings different papers to mind. –  vdv Jan 18 '13 at 15:51
add comment

Bob Rehder's work may be of interest, for instance:

Rehder, B., & Hoffman, A. B. (2005). Thirty-something categorization results explained: Selective attention, eyetracking, and models of category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 811-829.

You will see some eye-tracking data on some classic results, but if you are after the so called performance aspects of the data, this will be reported also.

You might also find the following data interesting, they are working with discrete category dimensions and corrective feedback:

Blair, Mark R., et al. "Extremely selective attention: Eye-tracking studies of the dynamic allocation of attention to stimulus features in categorization." Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35.5 (2009): 1196.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.