What is it about?
This paper discusses how humans apply what they've learned in one situation to new, different situations (a process called generalization). It's a reply to another research paper that suggested higher-level thinking (like using rules) is more important than how we perceive and remember things when we generalize. The authors of this reply argue that the other paper's reanalysis of their data has some issues. They believe that both how we see and remember stimuli (like colors or shapes) and higher-level cognitive processes play important roles, and these factors exist on a spectrum. Instead of strictly sticking to old theories, the authors encourage researchers to keep challenging our understanding by adding new evidence, especially from perception and memory research, into existing models of generalization. The paper emphasizes that understanding the complex interplay between these different processes is key to getting a fuller picture of how people generalize, which is important for advancing psychological theory and its uses in real life.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
This work is important because it highlights the ongoing challenge and complexity in understanding how humans generalize learned information to new situations. It's timely as it engages with a recent critique and argues for a more nuanced view that moves beyond simple dichotomies (like perception vs. cognition). The paper stresses the need to integrate new evidence, particularly from perception and memory research, into existing theories of generalization. This is crucial because a more comprehensive understanding of generalization can significantly advance psychological theory and its practical applications, impacting how we approach learning and clinical treatments for conditions where generalization processes might be atypical. The authors contend that their original findings, supporting the role of idiosyncratic perception and memory, should not be dismissed and that future research needs to explore the interplay between various perceptual and cognitive mechanisms rather than viewing them as mutually exclusive. The call for rigorous examination of diverse perspectives and integrated modeling approaches can foster a more complete understanding of this fundamental cognitive process.
Perspectives
As researchers deeply invested in understanding the intricacies of human generalization, we felt it was crucial to respond to Lee and Schlegelmilch's commentary. Our main concern was that their reanalysis, while raising some valid points about model comparison, potentially oversimplified the debate by downplaying the significant role that individual differences in perception and memory play in how people generalize. We believe that scientific progress in this area hinges on moving beyond 'either/or' debates and instead embracing the complexity of how various processes—from basic stimulus representation to higher-level cognition—interact. This reply was an opportunity to re-emphasize that our work aims to integrate these different facets, not to champion one over the other. We also wanted to highlight that many of the concerns raised had been addressed in prior or concurrent work, sometimes even involving the commentators themselves, suggesting a broader evidence base supports our view. Ultimately, this exchange underscores the vitality of scientific discourse. Our hope is that by meticulously examining different theoretical assumptions and encouraging sophisticated experimental designs, the field can collaboratively build more comprehensive and robust models of human generalization. We see a challenging but exciting path forward, moving toward a richer understanding of how people adapt their learning to an ever-changing world.
Kenny Yu
Associatie KU Leuven
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Beyond dichotomies in generalization research: A reply to Lee and Schlegelmilch (2025)., Journal of Experimental Psychology General, April 2025, American Psychological Association (APA),
DOI: 10.1037/xge0001732.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
