Power Point 1 Flashcards
Prototype Theory
Rosch, 1978
prototype
“best exemplar” or a “typical” of the category
non-existent
composite
an average of category members commonly experienced
membership in a category is determined by comparing the item to a prototype that represents the category
an average of category members commonly experienced
Prototype Theory
Prototype Theory
-High Typicality
the closer the item is to the prototype (in term of features) of a given category, the more likely it will be considered a member of that category
high typicality members
the category member closely resembles the category prototype (it is like a “typical” member of the category)
the more “distant” the item is to the prototype of a given category, the less likely it will be considered a member of that category
Prototype Theory- Low Typicality
Prototype Theory- Low Typicality
the category member does not closely resemble a typical member of the category.
Prototype Theory- Empirical Evidence
Results of Rosh’s experiment, in which participants judged objects on a scale of 1 (good example of a category) to 7 (poor example)for ratings of birds
How well do good and poor examples of a category compare to other items within the category?
family resemblance- prototype theory
items in the category whose characteristics have a large amount of overlap with characteristics of other items in the category
high family resemblance items
high family resemblance items
items in the category whose characteristics have a large amount of overlap with characteristics of other items in the category
items in the category whose characteristics have minimal to no overlap with characteristics of other items in the category
low family resemblance items
low family resemblance items
items in the category whose characteristics have minimal to no overlap with characteristics of other items in the category
Prototype Theory
Family Resemblance
strong positive relationship between prototypicality and family resemblance
strong prototypical members of a category share many attributes with other members of the category (high family resemblance)
weak prototypical members of a category share few attributes with other members of the category (low family resemblance)
sentence verification paradigm
Prototype Theory
Typicality Effect
participants are asked to respond sentences with either a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response
“Is an apple a fruit?”
“Is a pomegranate a fruit?”
participants are asked to respond sentences with either a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response
“Is an apple a fruit?”
“Is a pomegranate a fruit?”
sentence verification paradigm
prototypical objects are processed ______ (“typicality effect”) - prototypical items result in faster decision times
preferentially
prototypical items result in ______ decision times
faster
In the sentence verification experiement, reaction times were faster for objects rated _____ in prototypicality
higher
prototypical objects are also named more _____
quickly
prototypical objects are recalled more ____
easily
Family resemblance
Things in a category resemble each other in a number of ways.
High prototypical items receive high ratings in terms of family resemblance.
typicality
People react rapidly to members of a category that are “typical” of the category.
Sentence Verification Paradigm.
Faster RTs to statements like “A _____ is a bird” when high-prototypical items (e.g., robin) are used than for low-prototypical items (e.g., ostrich).
naming/recall
People are more likely to list/recall some objects more than others when asked to name/recall objects in a category.
High-prototypical items are named/recalled first when people list/recall examples of a category.
Exemplar Approach
membership in a category is determined by comparing the item to other real, actual items of that category (or exemplars)
