Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T17:55:31.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New features for old: Creation or derivation?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 1998

Cyril R. Latimer
Cyril R. Latimer
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australiacyril@psych.usyd.edu.au www.psych.usyd.edu.au/staff/cyril
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Schyns, Goldstone & Thibaut oppose the notion of fixed feature analysis, suggesting the possibility of flexible feature creation in object recognition and categorisation. Such proposals cannot be assessed until clear definitions of the objects in question and their decompositions are formulated. Flexibility may come from the decompositions of objects rather than from feature creation.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , February 1998 , pp. 31 - 32
Copyright
© 1998 Cambridge University Press