Aaron B. Hoffman

Eyetracking and selective attention in category learning.

An eyetracking version of the classic Shepard, Hovland, and Jenkins (1961) experiment was conducted. Forty years of research has assumed that category learning often involves learning to selectively attend to only those stimulus dimensions useful for classification. We confirmed that participants learned to allocate their attention optimally. We also found that learners tend to fixate all stimulus dimensions early in learning. This result obtained despite evidence that participants were also testing one-dimensional rules during this period. Finally, the restriction of eye movements to only relevant dimensions tended to occur only after errors were largely (or completely) eliminated. We interpret these findings as consistent with multiple-systems theories of learning which maximize information input in order to maximize the number of learning modules involved, and which focus solely on relevant information only after one module has solved the learning problem.

The Costs of Supervised Classification: The Effect of Learning Task on Conceptual Flexibility

Research has shown that learning a concept via standard supervised classification leads to a focus on diagnostic features, whereas learning by inferring missing features promotes the acquisition of within-category information. Accordingly, we predicted that classification learning would produce a deficit in peoples ability to draw novel contrasts--distinctions that were not part of training--compared with feature inference learning. Two experiments confirmed that classification learners were at a disadvantage at making novel distinctions. Eye movement data indicated that this conceptual inflexibility was due to (a) a narrower attention profile that reduces the encoding of many category features and (b) learned inattention that inhibits the reallocation of attention to newly relevant information. Implications of these costs of supervised classification learning for views of conceptual structure are discussed.

Blocking in category learning

Many theories of category learning assume that learning is driven by a need to minimize classification error. When there is no classification error, therefore, learning of individual features should be negligible. The authors tested this hypothesis by conducting three category-learning experiments adapted from an associative learning blocking paradigm. Contrary to an error-driven account of learning, participants learned a wide range of information when they learned about categories, and blocking effects were difficult to obtain. Conversely, when participants learned to predict an outcome in a task with the same formal structure and materials, blocking effects were robust and followed the predictions of error-driven learning. The authors discuss their findings in relation to models of category learning and the usefulness of category knowledge in the environment.

Category dimensionality and feature knowledge : When more features are learned as easily as fewer

Three experiments compared the learning of lower-dimensional family resemblance categories (4 dimensions) with the learning of higher-dimensional ones (8 dimensions). Category-learning models incorporating error-driven learning, hypothesis testing, or limited capacity attention predict that additional dimensions should either increase learning difficulty or decrease learning of individual features. Contrary to these predictions, the experiments showed no slower learning of high-dimensional categories; instead, subjects learned more features from high-dimensional categories than from low-dimensional categories. This result obtained both in standard learning with feedback and in noncontingent, observational learning. These results show that rather than interfering with learning, categories with more dimensions cause individuals to learn more. The authors contrast the learning of family resemblance categories with learning in classical conditioning and probability learning paradigms, in which competition among features is well documented.

Prior Knowledge Enhances the Category Dimensionality Effect

A study of the combined influence of prior knowledge and stimulus dimensionality on category learning was conducted. Subjects learned category structures with the same number of necessary dimensions but with more or fewer additional, redundant dimensions and with either knowledge-related or knowledge-unrelated features. Minimal-learning models predict that all subjects, regardless of condition, either should learn the same number of dimensions or should respond more slowly to each dimension. Despite similar learning rates and response times, subjects learned more features in the high-dimensional than in the low-dimensional condition. Furthermore, prior knowledge interacted with dimensionality, increasing what was learned, especially in the high-dimensional case. A second experiment confirmed that the participants did, in fact, learn more features during the training phase, rather than simply inferring them at test. These effects can be explained by direct associations among features (representing prior knowledge), combined with feedback between features and the category label, as was shown by simulations of the knowledge resonance, or KRES, model of category learning.