Transformation rules in concept learning

Abstract

Two major classes of models have been proposed to explain concept learning: strength models and distance models (Hayes-Roth & Hayes-Roth, 1977). The present study demonstrates that subjects abstract transformation rules as defined by the Franks and Bransford 11971) distance model. Transformation rules characterize how the patterns of a concept differ from each other. Transformation rules are inconsistent with strength models, which assume that subjects abstract component features and not relational information characterizing the differences among patterns. Whether a strength model or a distance model is more appropriate in other instances of concept learning is probably a function of task demands, stimulus characteristics, and subject characteristics. © 1978 Psychonomic Society, Inc.