| | |
Summary: There is growing evidence and theoretical speculation
that all major memory systems contribute to category
learning (Ashby & O'Brien, 2005). For example, empiri-
cal evidence suggests that at least some types of category
learning are mediated by working memory (DeCaro,
Thomas, & Beilock, 2008; Maddox, Ashby, Ing, & Pick-
ering, 2004; Waldron &Ashby, 2001; Zeithamova & Mad-
dox, 2006), episodic/semantic memory (Hopkins, Myers,
Shohamy, Grossman, & Gluck, 2004; Knowlton, Squire,
& Gluck, 1994; Kolodny, 1994; Zaki, Nosofsky, Jessup,
& Unversagt, 2003), or procedural memory (Ashby, Ell,
& Waldron, 2003; Maddox, Bohil, & Ing, 2004). The one
conspicuously absent system in this list is the perceptual
representation memory system, or PRS (Schacter, 1990).
There is empirical evidence that the PRS is active during
perceptual categorization (Aizenstein et al., 2000; Reber,
Stark, & Squire, 1998a, 1998b), but this evidence is from
functional neuroimaging, not behavioral data. More spe-
cifically, we know of no evidence that the PRS mediates
category learning performance. The goal of this article is
|
