A creationist myth: Pragmatic combination not feature creation

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):19-20 (1998)

Abstract
Schyns et al. argue that flexibility in categorisation implies “feature creation.” We argue that this notion is flawed, that flexibility can be explained by combinations over fixed feature sets, and that feature creation would in any case fail to explain categorisation. We suggest that flexibility in categorisation is due to pragmatic factors influencing feature combination, rendering feature creation unnecessary.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s0140525x98260109
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,299
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

New-Feature Learning: How Common is It?Robert M. French & Mark Weaver - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):26-26.
Feature See, Feature Do.Philip J. Benson - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):18-19.
Who Needs Created Features?Katja Wiemer-Hastings & Arthur C. Graesser - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):39-39.
Flexible Feature Creation: Child's Play?Gedeon Deák - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):23-23.
New Features for Old: Creation or Derivation?Cyril R. Latimer - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):31-32.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
18 ( #516,271 of 2,290,952 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #833,703 of 2,290,952 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature