Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Ramscar, Yarlett, Dye, Denny and Thorpe (2010) showed how, consis tent with the predictions of error-driven learning models, the order in which stimuli are presented in training can affect category learning. Specifically, learners exposed to artificial language input where objects preceded their labels learned the discriminating features of categories better than learners exposed to input where labels preceded objects. We sought to replicate this finding in two online experiments employing the same tests used originally: A four pictures test (match a label to one of four pictures) and a four labels test (match a picture to one of four labels). In our study, only findings from the four pictures test were consistent with the original result. Additionally, the effect sizes observed were smaller, and participants over-generalized high frequency category labels more than in the original study. We suggest that although Ramscar et al. [2010] feature-label order predictions were derived from error-driven learning, they failed to consider that this mechanism also predicts that perfomance in any training paradigm must inevitably be influ enced by participant prior experience. We consider our findings in light of these factors, and discuss implications for the generalizability and replication of training studies


Journal article


Cognitive Science

Publication Date