The effects of category generalizations and instance similarity on schema abstraction.
Abstract
Three experiments were designed to differentiate two models of schema abstraction. One model, called the generalization model, proposes that category generalizations, defined as feature combinations which occur frequently across study items, are abstracted during learning and used to classify transfer items. According to the other model, called the instance-only model, transfer items are classified according to their similarity to studied items. Study materials were constructed which either yielded category generalizations (generalize condition) or did not (control condition). Transfer items differed on whether they were classifiable by category generalizations and on their similarity to study items. In Experiments I and III, accuracy and confidence on transfer items was better in the generalize condition than in the control condition. Experiment II manipulated the order in which generalizable study items were presented for study: Items were either blocked, so that items contributing to a category generalization occurred close in the study sequence, or randomly ordered. Study items were learned faster and transfer performance was better with blocked presentation than with random presentation. In all three experiments, there was an effect for the similarity of transfer items to study material. There was some evidence suggesting an advantage for partially matching a category generalization. The results support a schema abstraction model in which transfer is a function of simila…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dimensions of Consumer Expertise
Alba, J. W., & Hutchinson, J. W. (1987) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209080 · Cited by 4,375 · see citing works
Acquisition of cognitive skill
Anderson, J. R. (1982) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.89.4.369 · Cited by 3,663 · see citing works
Self-citationSelf-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems
Chi, M. (1989) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5 · Cited by 2,287 · see citing works
Self‐Explanations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1 · Cited by 1,714 · see citing works
Array models for category learning
Estes, W. K. (1986) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(86)90008-3 · Cited by 356 · see citing works
Carvalho, P. F., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0371-0 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
A systematic review of interleaving as a concept learning strategy
Firth, J., Rivers, I., & Boyle, J. (2021) · Review of Education · doi:10.1002/rev3.3266 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
- Authors
- Elio, R., & Anderson, J. R.
- ORCID
- Anderson, John R.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
- Published
- 1981-11
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 397-417
- ISSN
- 0096-1515 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2043343155
- Cited by
- 205
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 8.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Learning & Memory (publishedVersion)
- Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Keywords
- schema abstraction, category generalization, instance similarity, transfer learning, feature combination, classification accuracy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review