A creationist myth: Pragmatic combination not feature creation

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


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.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 77,712

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

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.


Added to PP

18 (#620,786)

6 months
1 (#481,788)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references