The Library

Absolute identification is relative: a reply to Brown, Marley, and Lacouture (2007)

Tools

Stewart, Neil. (2007) Absolute identification is relative: a reply to Brown, Marley, and Lacouture (2007). Psychological Review, Vol.114 (No.2). pp. 533-588. ISSN 0033-295X

Preview

PDF
WRAP_Stewart_absolute.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (159Kb)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.533

Abstract

N. Stewart, G. D. A. Brown, and N. Chater presented a relative judgment model (RJM) of absolute identification, in which the current stimulus is judged relative to the preceding stimulus. S. Brown, A. A. J. Marley, and Y. Lacouture found that the RJM does not predict their finding of increased accuracy after large stimulus jumps, except at the expense of other effects. In fact, the RJM does predict both the core effects and increased accuracy after large jumps (although it underestimates this effect) when better constrained parameters are estimated from the trial-by-trial raw data rather than from summary plots. Further, a modified RJM, in which the stimulus from two trials ago is sometimes used as a referent, provides a better fit.

Item Type:

Journal Article

Subjects:

B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology

Divisions:

Faculty of Science > Psychology

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):

Similarity judgment, Decision making -- Testing

Journal or Publication Title:

Psychological Review

Publisher:

American Psychological Association

ISSN:

0033-295X

Official Date:

April 2007

Dates:

Date	Event
April 2007	Published

Volume:

Vol.114

Number:

No.2

Number of Pages:

Page Range:

pp. 533-588

Identification Number:

10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.533

Status:

Peer Reviewed

Access rights to Published version:

Open Access

Funder:

Economic and Social Research Council (Great Britain) (ESRC)

Grant number:

RES-00-23-1372 (ESRC)

Version or Related Resource:

Written as a response to: Brown, S., Marley, A. A. J. and Lacouture, Y. (2007). Is absolute identification always relative? Comment on Stewart, Brown, and Chater (2005). Psychological Review, 114(2), 528-532.

References:

1. Brown, S., Marley, A. A. J. & Lacouture, Y. (2007). Is absolute identification always relative? Comment on Stewart, Brown, and Chater (2005). Psychological Review, 114, 528-532.
2. Durlach, N. I. & Braida, L. D. (1969). Intensity perception. I. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 46, 372-383.
3. Karpiuk, P., Lacouture, Y., & Marley, A. A. J. (1997). A limited capacity, wave equality, random walk model of absolute identification. In A. A. J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce (pp. 279-299). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Kent, C. & Lamberts, L. (2005). An exemplar account of the bow and set size effects in absolute identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 289-305.
5. Lacouture, Y. (1997). Bow, range, and sequential effects in absolute identification: A response-time analysis. Psychological Research, 60, 121-133.
6. Lacouture, Y. & Marley, A. A. J. (2004). Choice and response time processes in the identification and categorization of unidimensional stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 1206-1266.
7. Laming, D. R. J. (1984). The relativity of "absolute" judgements. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 152-183.
8. Luce, R. D., Green, D. M. & Weber, D. L. (1976). Attention bands in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 20, 49-54.
9. Luce, R. D., Nosofsky, R. M., Green, D. M. & Smith, A. F. (1982). The bow and sequential effects in absolute identification. Perception & Psychophysics, 32, 397-408.
10. Marley, A. A. J. & Cook, V. T. (1984). A fixed rehearsal capacity interpretation of limits on absolute identification performance. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 37, 136-151.
11. Neath, I. & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). Further applications of a local distinctiveness model of memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 46, 201-243.
12. Nelder, J. A. & Mead, R. (1965). A simplex method for function minimization. Computer Journal, 7, 308-313.
13. Nosofsky, R. M. (1983). Shifts of attention in the identification and discrimination of intensity. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 103-112.
14. Nosofsky, R. M. (1997). An exemplar-based random-walk model of speeded categorization and absolute judgment. In A. A. J. Marley (Ed.), Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce (pp. 347-365). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Petrov, A. A. & Anderson, J. R. (2005). The dynamics of scaling: A memory-based anchor model of category rating and absolute identification. Psychological Review, 112, 383-416.
16. Purks, S. R., Callahan, D. J., Braida, L. D. & Durlach, N. I. (1980). Intensity perception. X. Effect of preceding stimulus on identification performance. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 67, 634-637.
17. Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Cowan, N. & Pfaltz, M. (2004). Learning in a unidimensional absolute identification task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 938-944.
18. Shepard, R. N. (1957). Stimulus and response generalization: A stochastic model relating generalization to distance in psychological space. Psychometrika, 22, 325-345.
19. Siegel, W. (1972). Memory effects in the method of absolute judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 121-131.
20. Stewart, N. & Brown, G. D. A. (2004). Sequence effects in categorizing tones varying in frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 416-430.
21. Stewart, N., Brown, G. D. A. & Chater, N. (2005). Absolute identification by relative judgment. Psychological Review, 112, 881-911.
22. Treisman, M. (1985). The magical number seven and some other features of category scaling: Properties for a model of absolute judgment. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 29, 175-230.