Implicit and explicit processes in category-based induction: Is induction best when we don't think?

Stephanie Y. Chen, Brian H. Ross, Gregory L. Murphy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In category-based induction (CBI), people use category information to predict unknown properties of exemplars. When an item's classification is uncertain, normative principles and Bayesian models suggest that predictions should integrate information across all possible categories. However, researchers previously have found that people often base their predictions on only a single category. In the present studies, we investigated the possible distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI. Predictions of an object's motion took the form of either a catching task (implicit) or a verbal answer (explicit). When subjects made predictions implicitly (Experiment 1), they used categories as Bayesian models predict. Explicit predictions (Experiment 2) showed clearly nonnormative use of categories. This distinction between implicit and explicit processes was replicated with a within-subjects design (Experiment 3). When subjects learned categories implicitly (categories were never mentioned) in Experiment 4, their explicit predictions did not reflect integration of information across categories but again showed a nonnormative pattern of category use. These results provide support for a distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI and furthermore suggest that the same category knowledge may result in normative or nonnormative responding, depending on the response mode.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)227-246
Number of pages20
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: General
Volume143
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2014

Fingerprint

Research Personnel
Induction
Prediction
Experiment

Keywords

  • Category-based induction
  • Implicit processes
  • Reasoning

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Psychology(all)
  • Developmental Neuroscience
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Implicit and explicit processes in category-based induction : Is induction best when we don't think? / Chen, Stephanie Y.; Ross, Brian H.; Murphy, Gregory L.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 143, No. 1, 02.2014, p. 227-246.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Chen, Stephanie Y. ; Ross, Brian H. ; Murphy, Gregory L. / Implicit and explicit processes in category-based induction : Is induction best when we don't think?. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2014 ; Vol. 143, No. 1. pp. 227-246.
@article{dc61f7a6ed614a929186a911ec8ed7ef,
title = "Implicit and explicit processes in category-based induction: Is induction best when we don't think?",
abstract = "In category-based induction (CBI), people use category information to predict unknown properties of exemplars. When an item's classification is uncertain, normative principles and Bayesian models suggest that predictions should integrate information across all possible categories. However, researchers previously have found that people often base their predictions on only a single category. In the present studies, we investigated the possible distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI. Predictions of an object's motion took the form of either a catching task (implicit) or a verbal answer (explicit). When subjects made predictions implicitly (Experiment 1), they used categories as Bayesian models predict. Explicit predictions (Experiment 2) showed clearly nonnormative use of categories. This distinction between implicit and explicit processes was replicated with a within-subjects design (Experiment 3). When subjects learned categories implicitly (categories were never mentioned) in Experiment 4, their explicit predictions did not reflect integration of information across categories but again showed a nonnormative pattern of category use. These results provide support for a distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI and furthermore suggest that the same category knowledge may result in normative or nonnormative responding, depending on the response mode.",
keywords = "Category-based induction, Implicit processes, Reasoning",
author = "Chen, {Stephanie Y.} and Ross, {Brian H.} and Murphy, {Gregory L.}",
year = "2014",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1037/a0032064",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "143",
pages = "227--246",
journal = "Journal of Experimental Psychology: General",
issn = "0096-3445",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implicit and explicit processes in category-based induction

T2 - Is induction best when we don't think?

AU - Chen, Stephanie Y.

AU - Ross, Brian H.

AU - Murphy, Gregory L.

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - In category-based induction (CBI), people use category information to predict unknown properties of exemplars. When an item's classification is uncertain, normative principles and Bayesian models suggest that predictions should integrate information across all possible categories. However, researchers previously have found that people often base their predictions on only a single category. In the present studies, we investigated the possible distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI. Predictions of an object's motion took the form of either a catching task (implicit) or a verbal answer (explicit). When subjects made predictions implicitly (Experiment 1), they used categories as Bayesian models predict. Explicit predictions (Experiment 2) showed clearly nonnormative use of categories. This distinction between implicit and explicit processes was replicated with a within-subjects design (Experiment 3). When subjects learned categories implicitly (categories were never mentioned) in Experiment 4, their explicit predictions did not reflect integration of information across categories but again showed a nonnormative pattern of category use. These results provide support for a distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI and furthermore suggest that the same category knowledge may result in normative or nonnormative responding, depending on the response mode.

AB - In category-based induction (CBI), people use category information to predict unknown properties of exemplars. When an item's classification is uncertain, normative principles and Bayesian models suggest that predictions should integrate information across all possible categories. However, researchers previously have found that people often base their predictions on only a single category. In the present studies, we investigated the possible distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI. Predictions of an object's motion took the form of either a catching task (implicit) or a verbal answer (explicit). When subjects made predictions implicitly (Experiment 1), they used categories as Bayesian models predict. Explicit predictions (Experiment 2) showed clearly nonnormative use of categories. This distinction between implicit and explicit processes was replicated with a within-subjects design (Experiment 3). When subjects learned categories implicitly (categories were never mentioned) in Experiment 4, their explicit predictions did not reflect integration of information across categories but again showed a nonnormative pattern of category use. These results provide support for a distinction between implicit and explicit processes in CBI and furthermore suggest that the same category knowledge may result in normative or nonnormative responding, depending on the response mode.

KW - Category-based induction

KW - Implicit processes

KW - Reasoning

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84893365980&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84893365980&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/a0032064

DO - 10.1037/a0032064

M3 - Article

C2 - 23506087

AN - SCOPUS:84893365980

VL - 143

SP - 227

EP - 246

JO - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

SN - 0096-3445

IS - 1

ER -