“Object Categorization: Reversals and Explanations of the Basic-Level Advantage” (Rogers & Patterson, 2007): A simplicity account

T. T. Rogers and K. Patterson (2007), in their article “Object Categorization: Reversals and Explanations of the Basic-Level Advantage” (Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 451–469), reported an impressive set of results demonstrating a reversal of the highly robust basic-level advantage both in patients with semantic dementia and in healthy individuals engaged in a speeded categorization task. To explain their results, as well as the usual basic-level advantage seen in healthy individuals, the authors employed a parallel distributed processing theory of conceptual knowledge. In this paper, we introduce an alternative way of explaining the results of Rogers and Patterson, which is premised on a more restricted set of assumptions born from standard categorization theory. Specifically, we provide evidence that their results can be accounted for based on the predictions of the simplicity model of unsupervised categorization.     

Object categorization: reversals and explanations of the basic-level advantage

People are generally faster and more accurate to name or categorize objects at the basic level (e.g., dog) relative to more general (animal) or specific (collie) levels, an effect replicated in Experiment 1 for categorization of object pictures. To some, this pattern suggests a dual-process mechanism, in which objects first activate basic-level categories directly and later engage more general or specific categories through the spread of activation in a processing hierarchy. This account is, however, challenged by data from Experiment 2 showing that neuropsychological patients with impairments of conceptual knowledge categorize more accurately at superordinate levels than at the basic level--suggesting that knowledge about an object's general nature does not depend on prior basic-level categorization. The authors consider how a parallel distributed processing theory of conceptual knowledge can reconcile the apparent discrepancy. This theory predicts that if healthy individuals are encouraged to make rapid categorization responses, the usual basic > general advantage should also reverse, a prediction tested and confirmed in Experiment 3. Implications for theories of visual object recognition are discussed.     

Searching through the hierarchy: How level of target categorization affects visual search

Does the same basic-level advantage commonly observed in the categorization literature also hold for targets in a search task? We answered this question by first conducting a category verification task to define a set of categories showing a standard basic-level advantage, which we then used as stimuli in a search experiment. Participants were cued with a picture preview of the target or its category name at either superordinate, basic, or subordinate levels, then shown a target-present/absent search display. Although search guidance and target verification was best using pictorial cues, the effectiveness of the categorical cues depended on the hierarchical level. Search guidance was best for the specific subordinate-level cues, whereas target verification showed a standard basic-level advantage. These findings demonstrate different hierarchical advantages for guidance and verification in categorical search. We interpret these results as evidence for a common target representation underlying categorical search guidance and verification.     

Parts in object concepts: Experiments with artificial categories

Previous research has demonstrated that basic-level categories are associated with the parts of objects. Five experiments were conducted to investigate whether this correlation is caused by a psychological principle that requires basic concepts to have common parts. This hypothesis was investigated in the experiments by separating part and nonpart information in artificial categories. Basic-level structure was measured in two ways: as the level with the highest ratio of within-category similarity to between-category similarity, and as the level with the fastest categorization time in an object-identification task. The results revealed that basic-level structure could be found in categories that did not have parts in common. Furthermore, nonpart information, such as size, color, and texture, could both enhance the basic level and eliminate the basic-level advantage, depending on whether the nonpart information was consistent with or contradicted the part information. These results suggest that, psychologically, parts are neither necessary nor sufficient to form a basic level.     

The speed and accuracy of material recognition in natural images

We studied the time course of material categorization in natural images relative to superordinate and basic-level object categorization, using a backward-masking paradigm. We manipulated several low-level features of the images—including luminance, contrast, and color—to assess their potential contributions. The results showed that the speed of material categorization was roughly comparable to the speed of basic-level object categorization, but slower than that of superordinate object categorization. The performance seemed to be crucially mediated by low-level factors, with color leading to a solid increase in performance for material categorization. At longer presentation durations, material categorization was less accurate than both types of object categorization. Taken together, our results show that material categorization can be as fast as basic-level object categorization, but is less accurate.     

Training experts: individuation without naming is worth it

There is growing evidence that individuation experience is necessary for development of expert object discrimination that transfers to new exemplars. Individuation training in human studies has primarily used label association tasks where labels are learned at both the individual and more abstract (basic) level, and expertise criterion requires that individual-level judgments become as fast as basic-level judgments. However, there are training situations when the use of labels is not practical (e.g., with animals or some clinical populations). Moreover, labeling itself can facilitate object discrimination, thus it is unclear what role labels play in the acquisition of expertise in such training paradigms. Here, participants completed an online game that did not require labels in which they interacted with novel objects (Greebles) or control objects (Yufos). Games either required individuation or categorization. We then assessed the impact of this exposure on an abridged Greeble training paradigm. As expected, participants who played Yufo games or Greeble categorization games showed a significant basic-level advantage for Greebles in the abridged training paradigm, typical of novices. However, participants who played the Greeble identity game showed a reduced basic-level advantage, suggesting that individuation without labels may be sufficient to acquire perceptual expertise.     

An analysis of letter expertise in a levels-of-categorization framework

While there has been increasing effort in dissociating the neural substrates recruited by perception of different objects, the theoretical and behavioural work needed to understand such dissociation lags behind. In an attempt to compare expertise in letter and face perception, we outline a theoretical framework that characterizes different types of object expertise based on the task demand (level of abstraction) required in object categorization. Face perception requires categorization at a subordinate level, whereas letter perception involves mainly basic-level categorization. Accordingly face and letter perception should represent two different types of expertise and display different neural and behavioural markers. Results from three behavioural experiments supported the predictions of the framework in that letter expertise is characterized by an enhancement of the basic-level advantage, instead of its attenuation as typically found for face perception. We compare this framework with Farah's taxonomy of visual abilities based on cooccurrence of deficits in visual agnosias.     

Effects of stimulus duration and choice delay on visual categorization in pigeons

We [Lazareva, O. F., Freiburger, K. L., & Wasserman, E. A. (2004). Pigeons concurrently categorize photographs at both basic and superordinate levels. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11, 1111-1117] previously trained four pigeons to classify color photographs into their basic-level categories (cars, chairs, flowers, or people) or into their superordinate-level categories (natural or artificial). Here, we found that brief stimulus durations had the most detrimental effect on the basic-level discrimination of natural stimuli by the same pigeons. Increasing the delay between stimulus presentation and choice responding had greater detrimental effect on the basic-level discrimination than the superordinate-level discrimination. These results suggest that basic-level discriminations required longer stimulus durations and were more subject to forgetting than were superordinate-level discriminations. Additionally, categorization of natural stimuli required longer stimulus durations than categorization of artificial stimuli, but only at the basic level. Together, these findings suggest that basic-level categorization may not always be superior to superordinate-level categorization and provide additional evidence of a dissociation between natural and artificial stimuli in pigeons’ categorization.     

汉语儿童6岁前范畴层次词汇的发展研究

本研究利用个案跟踪语料和控制实验数据,考察了汉语儿童6岁前范畴层次词汇的发展情况。研究表明,基本层次词汇在产出和理解方面均占优势,名词层级的发展主要表现为下位层次词语的增加。儿童对范畴层次词汇的正确产出和理解率从高到低排序依次为基本层次、下位层次和上位层次词汇。本研究为佐证基本层次词语在汉语儿童早期语言发展中占据概念的主导地位提供了经验支持,并支持原型理论对儿童范畴分类能力发展的阐释。     

Detecting objects is easier than categorizing them

Two experiments compared performance in an object detection task, in which participants categorized photographs as objects and nonobject textures, and an object categorization task, in which photographs were categorized into basic-level categories. The basic-level categorization task was either easy (e.g., dogs vs. buses) or difficult (e.g., dogs vs. cats). Participants performed similarly in the detection and the easy-categorization tasks, but response times to the difficult-categorization task were slower. This latter finding is difficult to reconcile with the conclusions of Grill-Spector and Kanwisher (2005) who reported equivalent performance on detection and basic-level categorization tasks and took this as evidence that figure-ground segregation and basic-level categorization are mediated by the same mechanism.     

The Briefest of Glances: The Time Course of Natural Scene Understanding

ABSTRACT— What information is available from a brief glance at a novel scene? Although previous efforts to answer this question have focused on scene categorization or object detection, real-world scenes contain a wealth of information whose perceptual availability has yet to be explored. We compared image exposure thresholds in several tasks involving basic-level categorization or global-property classification. All thresholds were remarkably short: Observers achieved 75%-correct performance with presentations ranging from 19 to 67 ms, reaching maximum performance at about 100 ms. Global-property categorization was performed with significantly less presentation time than basic-level categorization, which suggests that there exists a time during early visual processing when a scene may be classified as, for example, a large space or navigable, but not yet as a mountain or lake. Comparing the relative availability of visual information reveals bottlenecks in the accumulation of meaning. Understanding these bottlenecks provides critical insight into the computations underlying rapid visual understanding.     

Familiarity effects on categorization levels of faces and objects

It is well established that faces, in contrast to objects, are categorized as fast or faster at the individual level (e.g., Bill Clinton) than at the basic-level (e.g., human face). This subordinate-shift from basic-level categorization has been considered an outcome of visual expertise with processing faces. However, in the present study we found that, similar to familiar faces, categorization of individually-known familiar towers is also faster at the individual level than at the basic-level in naïve participants. In addition, category-verification of familiar stimuli, at basic and superordinate levels, was slower and less accurate compared to unfamiliar stimuli. Thus, the existence of detailed semantic information, regardless of expertise, can induce a shift in the default level of object categorization from basic to individual level. Moreover, the individually-specific knowledge is not only more easily-retrieved from memory but it might also interfere with accessing more general category information.     

The preferred level of face categorization depends on discriminability

People usually categorize objects more quickly at the basic level (e.g., “dog”) than at the subordinate (e.g., “collie”) or superordinate (e.g., “animal”) levels. Notable exceptions to this rule include objects of expertise, faces, or atypical objects (e.g., “penguin,” “poodle”), all of which show faster than normal subordinate-level categorization. We hypothesize that the subordinate-level reaction time advantage for faces is influenced by their discriminability relative to other faces in the stimulus set. First, we replicated the subordinate-level advantage for faces (Experiment 1) and then showed that a basic-level advantage for faces can be elicited by increasing the perceptual similarity of the face stimuli, making discrimination more difficult (Experiment 2). Finally, we repeated both effects within subjects, showing that individual faces were slower to be categorized in the context of similar faces and more quickly categorized among diverse faces (Experiment 3).     

The Effects of Prior Processing Episodes on Basic level Superiority

Four experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of prior processing episodes on people's preference for categorizing objects at the basic level (e.g. dog) relative to their preference for categorizing at the superordinate (e.g. animal) and the subordinate (e.g. Dalmation) levels. The prior processing episode in Experiment 1 was designed to induce subjects to activate representations at the superordinate level, and those in the remaining experiments were designed to induce subjects to differentiate objects at the subordinate level. After the prior processing episodes, subjects performed either a free naming or a picture categorization task that required them to decide whether an illustrated object belonged to a specified category. Results showed that prior processing episodes modestly reduced the superiority of basic level to superordinate level and subordinate level in categorization but not in free naming. The results suggest that the basic-level advantage is subject to the effects of context, but the effects are not as strong as the context effects on other aspects of categorization behaviour (e.g. rating typicality of a category member). Hence, the preference for the basic level is a somewhat more stable, invariant aspect of conceptual representation. Possible determinations of this stability are discussed.     

Further evidence on the validity of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: addressing questions raised by Rogers, Sewell, Harrison, and Jordan and Nichols

The reviews by Rogers, Sewell, Harrison, and Jordan (2006/this issue), and by Nichols (2006/this issue) offer markedly contrasting appraisals of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales introduced by Tellegen et al. (2003). The one common feature is that both reviews draw on the same atypical MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) data set for their empirical analyses, with results warranting critical scrutiny. Rogers et al.'s critique provides an evaluation of the RC Scales from the perspective of Jackson's (1970) method of test development. One significant issue in Rogers et al.'s review concerns social desirability, prompting us to clarify our own views on this topic. We also highlight and discuss problems associated with Rogers et al.'s use of the unrepresentative data set. Nichols's polemical critique neglects empirical and theoretical support for demoralization as a central construct and misconstrues as "construct drift" the purposeful process of developing the RC scales. Nichols's criticisms and proposals overlook requirements for assessing syndromes and for construct validation and even rudiments of scale development. Our reply incorporates evidence, including new findings, refuting his criticisms and confirming that demoralization is a pervasive MMPI dimension, that the RC Scales capture the major distinctive features of the original Clinical Scales, and that they generate correspondingly meaningful validity patterns.     

Cecil H. "Pat" Patterson (1912-2006)

Cecil Holden "Pat" Patterson, 93, passed away on May 26, 2006, at his home in Asheville, North Carolina. A fellow of APA's Divisions of Counseling Psychology (17), Rehabilitation Psychology (22), and Psychotherapy (29), Pat was elected president of APA Division 17 in 1972. In recognition of his lifelong commitment to the field, he received the Division 17 Leona Tyler Award in 1994. Cecil H. "Pat" Patterson will be remembered as much for his love of family and the genuine personal interest he took in everyone he met as he will for his outstanding professional achievements.     

Inductive Reasoning in Alzheimer''s Disease

We evaluated knowledge of basic level and superordinate semantic relations and the role of cognitive resources during inductive reasoning in probable Alzheimer's disease (AD). Nineteen mildly demented AD patients and 17 healthy control subjects judged the truthfulness of arguments with a premise and a conclusion that contain familiar concepts coupled with "blank" predicates, such as "Spiders contain phosphatidylcholine; therefore all insects contain phosphatidylcholine." Like healthy control subjects, AD patients were relatively insensitive to the typicality of the premise category when judging the strength of arguments with a conclusion containing a basic-level concept, but were relatively sensitive to typicality during judgments of arguments containing a superordinate in the conclusion. Moreover, AD patients resembled control subjects in judging arguments with an immediate superordinate in the conclusion compared to arguments with a distant superordinate. AD patients differed from control subjects because they could not take advantage of two premises in an argument containing basic-level concepts. We conclude that semantic knowledge is sufficiently preserved in AD to support inductive reasoning, but that limited cognitive resources may interfere with AD patients' ability to consider the entire spectrum of information available during semantic challenges.     

Detecting objects is easier than categorizing them

Two experiments compared performance in an object detection task, in which participants categorized photographs as objects and nonobject textures, and an object categorization task, in which photographs were categorized into basic-level categories. The basic-level categorization task was either easy (e.g., dogs vs. buses) or difficult (e.g., dogs vs. cats). Participants performed similarly in the detection and the easy-categorization tasks, but response times to the difficult-categorization task were slower. This latter finding is difficult to reconcile with the conclusions of Grill-Spector and Kanwisher (2005) Grill-Spector, G. and Kanwisher, N. 2005. Visual recognition: As soon as you know it is there, you know what it is. Psychological Science, 16: 152–160. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar] who reported equivalent performance on detection and basic-level categorization tasks and took this as evidence that figure–ground segregation and basic-level categorization are mediated by the same mechanism.     

Semantic memory: A feature-based analysis and new norms for Italian

Semantic norms for properties produced by native speakers are valuable tools for researchers interested in the structure of semantic memory and in category-specific semantic deficits in individuals following brain damage. The aims of this study were threefold. First, we sought to extend existing semantic norms by adopting an empirical approach to category (Exp. 1) and concept (Exp. 2) selection, in order to obtain a more representative set of semantic memory features. Second, we extensively outlined a new set of semantic production norms collected from Italian native speakers for 120 artifactual and natural basic-level concepts, using numerous measures and statistics following a feature-listing task (Exp. 3b). Finally, we aimed to create a new publicly accessible database, since only a few existing databases are publicly available online.