| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,000,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,000,000)
Fiscal Year 1995: ¥400,000 (Direct Cost: ¥400,000)
Fiscal Year 1994: ¥1,600,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,600,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
We questioned whether the findings of previous research about categorization in which artificial visual patterns were as stimuli in experiment are applicable to the categorization of natural visual pattern (e.g., butterfly pattern). Six experiments were conducted. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 used schematic butterfly patterns as stimuli. Subjects were exposed to a subset of instances of th epattern that varied in their transformational distance from the prototype, and then given a recognition rating test. These experiments showed the following. (1) Recognition ratng was found to be related to each instance's family resemblance score (Rosch & Mervis, 1975) rather than its transformational distance (Franks & Bransford, 1971). (2) five physical features (fore wing, hind wing, size, body length and color) of the stimulus affected recognition confidence ratings differently when the family resemblance score (FRS) of each instance was kept equally. Moreover, even if both the FRS of each instance a
… More
nd the frequency of occurrence of each feature were kept equally, each feature affected recognition confidence ratings differently. Especially, fore wing was most influential feature in recognition confidence rating. Experiment 4 and 5 investigated the effects of kinds of change (addition or deletion) which were applied to original photographs of natural butterflies. The recognition test showed higher accuracy in the patterns with added features than with deleted features. In addition, we replicated the most influential effects of fore wing. In Experiment 6, the relationship between the effects of kinds of change and the similarity judgment between each photograph and prototypical image of butterflies was investigated. The results showed that the patterns with added features were judged more unusual or odd than with deleted features, and it was suggested that this asymmetric confusability effect of addition and deletion on recognition was mediated by the factor of the similarity between each photograph and prototypical image of butterflies. Less
|
