Typicality in logically defined categories: exemplar-similarity versus rule instantiation.

A rule-instantiation model and a similarity-to-exemplars model were contrasted in terms of their predictions of typicality judgments and speeded classifications for members of logically defined categories. In Experiment 1, subjects learned a unidimensional rule based on the size of objects. It was assumed that items that maximally instantiated the rule were those farthest from the category boundary that separated small and large stimuli. In Experiment 2, subjects learned a disjunctive rule of the form "x or y or both". It was assumed that items that maximally instantiated the rule were those with both positive values (x and y). In both experiments, the frequency with which different exemplars were presented during classification learning was manipulated across conditions. These frequency manipulations exerted a major impact on subjects' postacquisition goodness-of-example judgments, and they also influenced reaction times in a speeded classification task. The results could not be predicted solely on the basis of the degree to which the rules were instantiated. The goodness judgments were predicted fairly well by a mixed exemplar model involving both relative-similarity and absolute-similarity components. It was concluded that even for logically defined concepts, stored exemplars may form a major component of the category representation.