English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Research on category-based induction has documented a consistent typicality effect: Typical exemplars promote stronger inferences about their broader category than atypical exemplars. This work has been largely confined to categories whose central tendencies are also the most typical members of the category. Does the typicality effect apply to the broad set of categories for which the ideal category member is considered most typical? In experiments with natural and artificial categories, typicality and induction-strength ratings were obtained for ideal and central-tendency exemplars. Induction strength was greatest for the central-tendency exemplars, regardless of whether the central tendency or the ideal was rated more typical. These results suggest that the so-called "typicality" effect is a special case of a more universal central-tendency effect in category-based induction.

What is typical about the typicality effect in category-based induction?