↓ Skip to main content

Relative cue encoding in the context of sophisticated models of categorization: Separating information from categorization

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Relative cue encoding in the context of sophisticated models of categorization: Separating information from categorization
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, December 2014
DOI 10.3758/s13423-014-0783-2
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Traditional studies of human categorization often treat the processes of encoding features and cues as peripheral to the question of how stimuli are categorized. However, in domains where the features and cues are less transparent, how information is encoded prior to categorization may constrain our understanding of the architecture of categorization. This is particularly true in speech perception, where acoustic cues to phonological categories are ambiguous and influenced by multiple factors. Here, it is crucial to consider the joint contributions of the information in the input and the categorization architecture. We contrasted accounts that argue for raw acoustic information encoding with accounts that posit that cues are encoded relative to expectations, and investigated how two categorization architectures-exemplar models and back-propagation parallel distributed processing models-deal with each kind of information. Relative encoding, akin to predictive coding, is a form of noise reduction, so it can be expected to improve model accuracy; however, like predictive coding, the use of relative encoding in speech perception by humans is controversial, so results are compared to patterns of human performance, rather than on the basis of overall accuracy. We found that, for both classes of models, in the vast majority of parameter settings, relative cues greatly helped the models approximate human performance. This suggests that expectation-relative processing is a crucial precursor step in phoneme categorization, and that understanding the information content is essential to understanding categorization processes.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 4 9%
Netherlands 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 40 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 21%
Researcher 10 21%
Professor 6 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 9 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 36%
Linguistics 8 17%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2014.
All research outputs
#21,155,664
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
#4
of 6 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,090
of 370,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one scored the same or higher as 2 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.