These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
137 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20921104)
1. Classification response times in probabilistic rule-based category structures: contrasting exemplar-retrieval and decision-boundary models. Nosofsky RM; Little DR Mem Cognit; 2010 Oct; 38(7):916-27. PubMed ID: 20921104 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Limitations of exemplar models of multi-attribute probabilistic inference. Nosofsky RM; Bergert FB J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2007 Nov; 33(6):999-1019. PubMed ID: 17983309 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Logical-rule models of classification response times: a synthesis of mental-architecture, random-walk, and decision-bound approaches. Fific M; Little DR; Nosofsky RM Psychol Rev; 2010 Apr; 117(2):309-48. PubMed ID: 20438229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Classification in well-defined and ill-defined categories: evidence for common processing strategies. Martin RC; Caramazza A J Exp Psychol Gen; 1980 Sep; 109(3):320-53. PubMed ID: 6447192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Exemplar and prototype models revisited: response strategies, selective attention, and stimulus generalization. Nosofsky RM; Zaki SR J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2002 Sep; 28(5):924-40. PubMed ID: 12219799 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Category variability, exemplar similarity, and perceptual classification. Cohen AL; Nosofsky RM; Zaki SR Mem Cognit; 2001 Dec; 29(8):1165-75. PubMed ID: 11913753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of similarity and practice on speeded classification response times and accuracies: further tests of an exemplar-retrieval model. Nosofsky RM; Alfonso-Reese LA Mem Cognit; 1999 Jan; 27(1):78-93. PubMed ID: 10087858 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Sequence-sensitive exemplar and decision-bound accounts of speeded-classification performance in a modified Garner-tasks paradigm. Little DR; Wang T; Nosofsky RM Cogn Psychol; 2016 Sep; 89():1-38. PubMed ID: 27472912 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Observational versus feedback training in rule-based and information-integration category learning. Ashby FG; Maddox WT; Bohil CJ Mem Cognit; 2002 Jul; 30(5):666-77. PubMed ID: 12219884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A formal ideal-based account of typicality. Voorspoels W; Vanpaemel W; Storms G Psychon Bull Rev; 2011 Oct; 18(5):1006-14. PubMed ID: 21713370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Taking a gamble or playing by the rules: dissociable prefrontal systems implicated in probabilistic versus deterministic rule-based decisions. Bhanji JP; Beer JS; Bunge SA Neuroimage; 2010 Jan; 49(2):1810-9. PubMed ID: 19781652 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Response-time tests of logical-rule models of categorization. Little DR; Nosofsky RM; Denton SE J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Jan; 37(1):1-27. PubMed ID: 21058874 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The origin of exemplar effects in rule-driven categorization. Lacroix GL; Giguère G; Larochelle S J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2005 Mar; 31(2):272-88. PubMed ID: 15755245 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Feedback can be superior to observational training for both rule-based and information-integration category structures. Edmunds CE; Milton F; Wills AJ Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2015; 68(6):1203-22. PubMed ID: 25397975 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]