How Category Learning Affects Object Representations: Not All Morphspaces Stretch Alike
How does learning to categorize objects affect how people visually perceive them? Behavioral, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging studies have tested the degree to which category learning influences object representations, with conflicting results. Some studies have found that objects become more v...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition memory, and cognition, 2012-07, Vol.38 (4), p.807-820 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 820 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 807 |
container_title | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition |
container_volume | 38 |
creator | Folstein, Jonathan R Gauthier, Isabel Palmeri, Thomas J |
description | How does learning to categorize objects affect how people visually perceive them? Behavioral, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging studies have tested the degree to which category learning influences object representations, with conflicting results. Some studies have found that objects become more visually discriminable along dimensions relevant to previously learned categories, while others have found no such effect. One critical factor we explore here lies in the structure of the morphspaces used in different studies. Studies finding no increase in discriminability often use blended morphspaces, with morphparents lying at corners of the space. By contrast, studies finding increases in discriminability use factorial morphspaces, defined by separate morphlines forming axes of the space. Using the same 4 morphparents, we created both factorial and blended morphspaces matched in pairwise discriminability. Category learning caused a selective increase in discriminability along the relevant dimension of the factorial space, but not in the blended space, and led to the creation of functional dimensions in the factorial space, but not in the blended space. These findings demonstrate that not all morphspaces stretch alike: Only some morphspaces support enhanced discriminability to relevant object dimensions following category learning. Our results have important implications for interpreting neuroimaging studies reporting little or no effect of category learning on object representations in the visual system: Those studies may have been limited by their use of blended morphspaces. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1037/a0025836 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3390763</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ992346</ericid><sourcerecordid>2725592311</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a478t-59934ac0db77bc2d19114ab6dc5316c9048b2248b24d0b1d0e23c5734e6e24143</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkcFO3DAQhq2qqGwBqQ9QVZHogUtg7HHi-FIJrWgBrYSE4Gw5zuw2q2yc2tnCvj2JFhbaCz54Dv_nzzMaxr5wOOWA6swCiKzA_AObcI065aLIPrIJCFWkCjXus88xLmE8WHxi-0IomesMJkxe-odkanta-LBJZmRDW7eL5Hw-J9fH5KZcDjW5pS5QpLa3fe3beMj25raJdPRcD9j9z4u76WU6u_l1NT2fpVaqok8zrVFaB1WpVOlExTXn0pZ55TLkudMgi1KI8ZIVlLwCEugyhZJyEpJLPGA_tt5uXa6ockMDwTamC_XKho3xtjb_Jm392yz8X4OoQeU4CE6eBcH_WVPszaqOjprGtuTX0XAQKDQqFAN6_B-69OvQDuMNFIIELfg71Ojiuchev3XBxxhovmuZw2hT5mVhA_rt7Yg78GVDA_B1C1Co3S6-uNZaoBzff9_GtrOmixtnQ1-7hqJ5bFYGCyNNAQqfACAdoy8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1023291625</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How Category Learning Affects Object Representations: Not All Morphspaces Stretch Alike</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Folstein, Jonathan R ; Gauthier, Isabel ; Palmeri, Thomas J</creator><creatorcontrib>Folstein, Jonathan R ; Gauthier, Isabel ; Palmeri, Thomas J</creatorcontrib><description>How does learning to categorize objects affect how people visually perceive them? Behavioral, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging studies have tested the degree to which category learning influences object representations, with conflicting results. Some studies have found that objects become more visually discriminable along dimensions relevant to previously learned categories, while others have found no such effect. One critical factor we explore here lies in the structure of the morphspaces used in different studies. Studies finding no increase in discriminability often use blended morphspaces, with morphparents lying at corners of the space. By contrast, studies finding increases in discriminability use factorial morphspaces, defined by separate morphlines forming axes of the space. Using the same 4 morphparents, we created both factorial and blended morphspaces matched in pairwise discriminability. Category learning caused a selective increase in discriminability along the relevant dimension of the factorial space, but not in the blended space, and led to the creation of functional dimensions in the factorial space, but not in the blended space. These findings demonstrate that not all morphspaces stretch alike: Only some morphspaces support enhanced discriminability to relevant object dimensions following category learning. Our results have important implications for interpreting neuroimaging studies reporting little or no effect of category learning on object representations in the visual system: Those studies may have been limited by their use of blended morphspaces.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0278-7393</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1285</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/a0025836</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22746950</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Adult ; Change ; Classification ; Classification (Cognitive Process) ; Cognition & reasoning ; Context Effect ; Differences ; Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology ; Experimental psychology ; Female ; Geometric Concepts ; Human ; Humans ; Learning ; Learning - physiology ; Male ; Medical imaging ; Morphology ; Neurosciences ; Object Recognition ; Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology ; Perceptual Learning ; Photic Stimulation ; Pilot Projects ; Psychomotor Performance - physiology ; Reaction Time - physiology ; Stimulus Similarity ; Visual Perception ; Visual Perception - physiology</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2012-07, Vol.38 (4), p.807-820</ispartof><rights>2012 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2012 APA, all rights reserved</rights><rights>2012, American Psychological Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Jul 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a478t-59934ac0db77bc2d19114ab6dc5316c9048b2248b24d0b1d0e23c5734e6e24143</citedby><orcidid>0000-0001-7617-9797 ; 0000-0002-6249-4769</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ992346$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22746950$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Folstein, Jonathan R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Isabel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palmeri, Thomas J</creatorcontrib><title>How Category Learning Affects Object Representations: Not All Morphspaces Stretch Alike</title><title>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</title><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><description>How does learning to categorize objects affect how people visually perceive them? Behavioral, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging studies have tested the degree to which category learning influences object representations, with conflicting results. Some studies have found that objects become more visually discriminable along dimensions relevant to previously learned categories, while others have found no such effect. One critical factor we explore here lies in the structure of the morphspaces used in different studies. Studies finding no increase in discriminability often use blended morphspaces, with morphparents lying at corners of the space. By contrast, studies finding increases in discriminability use factorial morphspaces, defined by separate morphlines forming axes of the space. Using the same 4 morphparents, we created both factorial and blended morphspaces matched in pairwise discriminability. Category learning caused a selective increase in discriminability along the relevant dimension of the factorial space, but not in the blended space, and led to the creation of functional dimensions in the factorial space, but not in the blended space. These findings demonstrate that not all morphspaces stretch alike: Only some morphspaces support enhanced discriminability to relevant object dimensions following category learning. Our results have important implications for interpreting neuroimaging studies reporting little or no effect of category learning on object representations in the visual system: Those studies may have been limited by their use of blended morphspaces.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Change</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Classification (Cognitive Process)</subject><subject>Cognition & reasoning</subject><subject>Context Effect</subject><subject>Differences</subject><subject>Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology</subject><subject>Experimental psychology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Geometric Concepts</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning - physiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Morphology</subject><subject>Neurosciences</subject><subject>Object Recognition</subject><subject>Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology</subject><subject>Perceptual Learning</subject><subject>Photic Stimulation</subject><subject>Pilot Projects</subject><subject>Psychomotor Performance - physiology</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>Stimulus Similarity</subject><subject>Visual Perception</subject><subject>Visual Perception - physiology</subject><issn>0278-7393</issn><issn>1939-1285</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkcFO3DAQhq2qqGwBqQ9QVZHogUtg7HHi-FIJrWgBrYSE4Gw5zuw2q2yc2tnCvj2JFhbaCz54Dv_nzzMaxr5wOOWA6swCiKzA_AObcI065aLIPrIJCFWkCjXus88xLmE8WHxi-0IomesMJkxe-odkanta-LBJZmRDW7eL5Hw-J9fH5KZcDjW5pS5QpLa3fe3beMj25raJdPRcD9j9z4u76WU6u_l1NT2fpVaqok8zrVFaB1WpVOlExTXn0pZ55TLkudMgi1KI8ZIVlLwCEugyhZJyEpJLPGA_tt5uXa6ockMDwTamC_XKho3xtjb_Jm392yz8X4OoQeU4CE6eBcH_WVPszaqOjprGtuTX0XAQKDQqFAN6_B-69OvQDuMNFIIELfg71Ojiuchev3XBxxhovmuZw2hT5mVhA_rt7Yg78GVDA_B1C1Co3S6-uNZaoBzff9_GtrOmixtnQ1-7hqJ5bFYGCyNNAQqfACAdoy8</recordid><startdate>20120701</startdate><enddate>20120701</enddate><creator>Folstein, Jonathan R</creator><creator>Gauthier, Isabel</creator><creator>Palmeri, Thomas J</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7617-9797</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6249-4769</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20120701</creationdate><title>How Category Learning Affects Object Representations</title><author>Folstein, Jonathan R ; Gauthier, Isabel ; Palmeri, Thomas J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a478t-59934ac0db77bc2d19114ab6dc5316c9048b2248b24d0b1d0e23c5734e6e24143</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Change</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Classification (Cognitive Process)</topic><topic>Cognition & reasoning</topic><topic>Context Effect</topic><topic>Differences</topic><topic>Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology</topic><topic>Experimental psychology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Geometric Concepts</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning - physiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Morphology</topic><topic>Neurosciences</topic><topic>Object Recognition</topic><topic>Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology</topic><topic>Perceptual Learning</topic><topic>Photic Stimulation</topic><topic>Pilot Projects</topic><topic>Psychomotor Performance - physiology</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>Stimulus Similarity</topic><topic>Visual Perception</topic><topic>Visual Perception - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Folstein, Jonathan R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Isabel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Palmeri, Thomas J</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Folstein, Jonathan R</au><au>Gauthier, Isabel</au><au>Palmeri, Thomas J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ992346</ericid><atitle>How Category Learning Affects Object Representations: Not All Morphspaces Stretch Alike</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn</addtitle><date>2012-07-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>807</spage><epage>820</epage><pages>807-820</pages><issn>0278-7393</issn><eissn>1939-1285</eissn><abstract>How does learning to categorize objects affect how people visually perceive them? Behavioral, neurophysiological, and neuroimaging studies have tested the degree to which category learning influences object representations, with conflicting results. Some studies have found that objects become more visually discriminable along dimensions relevant to previously learned categories, while others have found no such effect. One critical factor we explore here lies in the structure of the morphspaces used in different studies. Studies finding no increase in discriminability often use blended morphspaces, with morphparents lying at corners of the space. By contrast, studies finding increases in discriminability use factorial morphspaces, defined by separate morphlines forming axes of the space. Using the same 4 morphparents, we created both factorial and blended morphspaces matched in pairwise discriminability. Category learning caused a selective increase in discriminability along the relevant dimension of the factorial space, but not in the blended space, and led to the creation of functional dimensions in the factorial space, but not in the blended space. These findings demonstrate that not all morphspaces stretch alike: Only some morphspaces support enhanced discriminability to relevant object dimensions following category learning. Our results have important implications for interpreting neuroimaging studies reporting little or no effect of category learning on object representations in the visual system: Those studies may have been limited by their use of blended morphspaces.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>22746950</pmid><doi>10.1037/a0025836</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7617-9797</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6249-4769</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0278-7393 |
ispartof | Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition, 2012-07, Vol.38 (4), p.807-820 |
issn | 0278-7393 1939-1285 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3390763 |
source | MEDLINE; EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES |
subjects | Adult Change Classification Classification (Cognitive Process) Cognition & reasoning Context Effect Differences Discrimination (Psychology) - physiology Experimental psychology Female Geometric Concepts Human Humans Learning Learning - physiology Male Medical imaging Morphology Neurosciences Object Recognition Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology Perceptual Learning Photic Stimulation Pilot Projects Psychomotor Performance - physiology Reaction Time - physiology Stimulus Similarity Visual Perception Visual Perception - physiology |
title | How Category Learning Affects Object Representations: Not All Morphspaces Stretch Alike |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T11%3A56%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20Category%20Learning%20Affects%20Object%20Representations:%20Not%20All%20Morphspaces%20Stretch%20Alike&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology.%20Learning,%20memory,%20and%20cognition&rft.au=Folstein,%20Jonathan%20R&rft.date=2012-07-01&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=807&rft.epage=820&rft.pages=807-820&rft.issn=0278-7393&rft.eissn=1939-1285&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/a0025836&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2725592311%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1023291625&rft_id=info:pmid/22746950&rft_ericid=EJ992346&rfr_iscdi=true |