Concept Formation

A Practical Report

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Course

of Practical (PSY 505)

Submitted to

Department of Psychology

Padmakanya Multiple Campus, Bagbazar, Kathmandu

Faculty of Humanities and Social Science

Tribhuvan University, Nepal

Submitted By

Anupa Adhikari

Roll no: 31
Abstract

This report outlines an experimental study focused on concept formation using specially

designed shapes referred to as "Radicals." The objective was to explore how individuals develop

and apply concepts through repeated exposure during a series of trials. In the study, a set of

original radical shapes was created, along with identical duplicates. Over the course of 10 trials,

participants were shown an original radical followed by its corresponding duplicate. Between

each trial, the original shapes were displayed again for 3 seconds. The findings indicated that by

the final trials, the participant was able to accurately identify and match the duplicate radicals

with their originals.

Table of contents............................................................................................................. 3

Introduction.................................................................................................................... 4

Concept formation................................................................................................... 4

Concept Formation Theories.................................................................................... 5

Objectives............................................................................................................... 6

Hypotheses............................................................................................................. 6

Significance of the study......................................................................................... 6

Literature Review.................................................................................................... 6

Method......................................................................................................................... 7

Study Design........................................................................................................... 7

Participants............................................................................................................. 7

Data Collection Tools/Materials................................................................................8

Procedure................................................................................................................ 8

Ethics...................................................................................................................... 9

Data Analysis.......................................................................................................... 9

Result....................................................................................................................... 10

Discussion and Conclusion....................................................................................... 10

Reference................................................................................................................. 11
Introduction

Concept formation

Concept formation is the mental process by which individuals learn to recognize patterns,

categorize stimuli, and understand shared characteristics among different items. In this

experiment, concept formation was explored using abstract shapes called Radicals. These

specially designed shapes served as unfamiliar and novel stimuli, eliminating the influence of

prior knowledge or associations. The aim was to observe how participants gradually form a

concept of what defines a “Radical” through repeated exposure and matching tasks. By

presenting both original and duplicate versions of each Radical across multiple trials, the study

sought to investigate how participants internalize the defining features of each shape and use that

understanding to make accurate identifications. This method helps highlight how abstract

concept formation occurs in a controlled, step-by-step manner.

The process of concept formation begins with experience, which means actively taking part in

something or directly encountering it. This process usually happens in three main steps:

a. Observation: First, we use our senses (like sight, hearing, and touch) to notice and take in

information about objects, events, or ideas.

b. Abstraction: Next, we focus on the similarities between different things and ignore the

differences. This helps us understand what they have in common.

c. Generalization: After seeing many examples, we form a general idea or understanding of

what the concept is.

There are mainly two types of concepts we form:

real-life examples and noticing what they have in common.

For example: We understand the concept of a "bird" by seeing animals like sparrows, crows, and

pigeons.

2. Artificial concepts: These are more exact and follow fixed rules or definitions. An item must

meet specific conditions to fit the concept.

For example: A triangle is always a shape with exactly three sides—this rule never changes.

Concept Formation Theories

a. Associationist Theory:

This theory says that we form concepts by repeatedly seeing similar things and linking them in

our minds. As we see more examples, we start to notice what they have in common.

For example: After seeing many kinds of chairs, we begin to recognize the features that all chairs

share, like having a seat and legs.

b. Constructivist Theory:

According to this theory, we build concepts by interacting with the world around us. Learning

happens step by step—from physical actions to more logical thinking.

For example: We understand the concept of “hot” by actually touching different hot things and

learning from experience.

c. Information Processing Theory:

This theory explains that concept formation involves taking in information, saving it in memory,

and using it when needed. It highlights the role of attention, memory, and thinking in learning.
For example: When we learn about animals, we remember their features, compare them, and use

that information to group them into categories like mammals or reptiles.

d. Prototyping Theory:

This theory suggests that we form concepts based on the best or most typical example, called a

prototype. We compare new things to this example to decide if they belong in the same group.

For example: If we think of a sparrow as a typical bird, we compare other birds to that image to

decide if they are also birds.

Objectives

1. To examine how individuals form concepts based on repeated exposure to unfamiliar

visual stimuli (Radicals).

2. To assess the ability of participants to recognize and match abstract shapes after multiple

trials.

3. To study the process of learning and identification when prior knowledge or labels are not

associated
Hypotheses

It is expected that the participant's ability to accurately identify the concepts will increase as the

trials progress. Additionally, it is anticipated that trials with longer response times will result in

more correct answers, as taking more time may reflect deeper thinking and more thorough

testing of possible patterns.

Significance of the study

 Explores how individuals categorize and generalize information.

 Reveals underlying cognitive processes like abstraction and rule-learning.

 Helps understand problem-solving and decision-making behavior.

 Useful in studying developmental stages of thinking (e.g., in children).

 Provides insights for educational and AI learning models.

Literature Review

Concept formation refers to the mental process by which we categorize and understand the world

by grouping similar objects, ideas, or experiences under common labels. This ability is

foundational for learning, problem-solving, and language development. In experimental

psychology, concept formation is studied through tasks that require participants to distinguish

between categories based on varying rules or patterns. It helps psychologists understand how
people develop abstract thinking and apply prior knowledge to novel situations. Early research

by Bruner and others emphasized active hypothesis testing, while modern approaches integrate

cognitive neuroscience and computational models.

Tano et al. (2018) – Flexible Language of Thought: Bayesian Grammar Updates

This insightful lab experiment showed that humans can quickly adapt the “language” they use

to form concepts. Participants learned simple categories, then were tested on novel examples.

The study revealed that exposure shaped their internal “rules,” helping subsequent learning—just

like programmers optimizing code templates. Their findings match predictions from a Bayesian

model, highlighting how we compile frequently used patterns into new, efficient mental shortcuts

Leshinskaya & Thompson-Schill (2019) – From Structure of Experience to Concepts of

Structure

Through clever categorization tasks where participants judged whether objects shared underlying

causal structures, this research emphasized how context and experience shape concept-

building. It showed that our brains don’t just slot things into neat boxes—they consider real-

world relations and uses, making the process dynamic and deeply tied to prior experience

Gabora et al. (2008) – Toward an Ecological Theory of Concepts

Though earlier, this work remains highly influential. Lab studies integrating perception,

context, and conceptual usage make a case for viewing concepts as living bridges between

mind and environment, not static labels. This “ecological” lens emphasizes fluid meanings

depending on situations—paving the way for richer experimental designs

Study Design

This study used an experimental design, where the participant was shown a set of shapes called

Radicals over 10 trials. In each trial, the original Radical was shown first, followed by a

duplicate, and the participant had to match it with the correct name. Between trials, the original

shapes were shown again for 3 seconds. The experiment controlled what the participant saw, how

often they saw it, and measured how well they could identify the shapes. The main aim was to

see if the participant could form and apply the concept of Radicals through repeated exposure

and comparison.
Participants

 Age: 26

 Sex: Male

 Educational background: MBBS

Data Collection Tools/Materials

 Original radicals

 Dublicate Radicals

 Paper for comparaison table

 Pencil

 Stop watch

Procedure

To begin the conversation the researcher greet the participant and starts with

the informal talk to bring the environment under control and create comfortable environment

for the participant. After that researcher starts to explain the procedure so that later on during

an experiment there would not be any ambiguity and make sure that participant have no any

confusion regarding test. Researcher make sure every tools are placed properly and after
confirmation begins the experiment.

At first researcher show the original radicals (total five radicals) for 3 seconds

each. After that the researcher again show the duplicate radicals respectively for 3 second

each radical and asked the name of the original radical that looks similar. Each and every

response is recorded in the list that has been prepare before, along with this the first trial is

complete and moving towards the second trial following the same steps with the original

radicals but switching the list of the duplicate radicals each time on every trials. Making sure

that no list of the duplicate radicals can be repeated otherwise error will occurs. Accordingly

all the steps are to be followed till 10 th trial.

After completing the 10 th trial the researcher thanks the participant for him

participation and appreciate for his active participation. Also ask him to give feedback and

comments in written which will be recorded by the researcher.

Ethics

Participant identity was not disclosed as he was not comfortable to disclose

his identity. The important thing to be noted is to maintain the confidentiality and provide a
healthy environment to the participant so that the experiment could be done properly. Also

the consent letter is must as it is the main guideline to maintain ethics, during this experiment

the consent letter was signed beforehand.

Data Analysis

The result was analyzed by counting how many duplicate radicals the participant correctly

matched with the original radicals. The value is calculated in percentage. A higher

percentage of correct responses indicated the better concept formation.

Table-1

Data Presentation

List of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total

Radicals correct

LUL ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ 6

SUS ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ 5

TAT ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ 5
 DAB ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ 8

KAL ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ 3

Total 2 2 3 1 1 5 3 2 3 5 27

Correct

Result

The aim of the study was to evaluate the participant's ability to form and apply concepts through

repeated visual exposure to specific radicals. The participant was presented with 10 trials in

which they were asked to identify matching radicals.

Out of a possible 50 correct responses (5 radicals × 10 trials), the participant successfully

matched 27 radicals correctly. This yields a correct response rate of 54%, calculated using the

formula:

Percentage= (Total correct /Total possible) ×100= (27/50)×100=54%

The individual performance across radicals varied:

 DAB had the highest number of correct matches (8/10),

 Followed by LUL (6/10),

 SUS and TAT (5/10 each),

The total number of correct responses per trial also fluctuated, ranging from a low of 1 correct

match (trials 4 and 5) to a high of 5 correct matches (trials 6 and 10). These results suggest

moderate success in concept formation, with performance improving in some later trials.

Overall, the data indicates that the participant demonstrated the ability to form and apply a visual

matching concept, as evidenced by more than half of the responses being accurate. This supports

the hypothesis that concept formation can be facilitated through repeated exposure and

comparison of visual patterns.

Discussion and Conclusion

The current experiment explored how well the participant could form and apply visual concepts

by repeatedly comparing abstract shapes (radicals). Overall, the results supported the idea that

concept formation can occur through visual comparison. The participant achieved a moderate

accuracy rate of 54% across 10 trials, showing they were gradually learning to identify similar

radicals. Their accuracy improved in the later trials, suggesting that repeated exposure helped

them internalize key visual patterns and features.

When looking at specific radicals, performance varied. The participant matched the radical DAB

most accurately (8 out of 10 times), while KAL had the lowest accuracy (3 out of 10). This

suggests that some shapes were easier to remember and recognize, possibly due to how visually

distinct or simple they were. The number of correct responses per trial ranged from 1 to 5,
hinting at other influences such as attention span, memory load, or how easily the participant

could mentally organize the visual information. These patterns align with major theories of

concept learning, including constructivist and information-processing models, which highlight

the importance of repetition, memory encoding, and pattern recognition (Alekhya, 2024; Medin

& Smith, 1984).

The study also reflects the principles of prototyping theory, which suggests that people compare

new information to a mental “ideal” or prototype. The participant may have developed a mental

image of what each radical typically looks like and used that to make comparisons. Although not

perfect, their performance shows that learning visual concepts is a gradual and dynamic process

that improves with experience. By using unfamiliar, abstract shapes (nonsense radicals), the

experiment minimized interference from prior knowledge, allowing a clearer view of pure visual

concept learning—similar to Ebbinghaus's early work with nonsense syllables.

In summary, the participant showed a developing ability to recognize common features among

abstract visuals through repeated comparisons. The 54% accuracy rate reflects an emerging skill

in visual concept formation, supporting the initial hypothesis. These results highlight how

cognitive processes like abstraction, pattern recognition, and memory retrieval play key roles in

categorizing visual information. They also point to broader applications in education,

experimental psychology, and cognitive training. Future studies with more participants and

diverse stimuli could help further explore how individuals differ in learning and processing

visual concepts.
Reference

Testbook. (2025, May 5). Process of concept formation: Exploring the types and theories.

https://testbook.com/ias-preparation/process-of-concept-formation

Alekhya, D. (2024, April 30). Concept formation: The realms of learner’s cognition.

ConnectedTOT.https://connectedtot.com/2024/04/30/concept-formation-the-realms-of-learners-

cognition/

Fletcher, K. A., Lee, M., & Lehman, K. (2019). A concept analysis of conceptual learning: A

guide for educators. Journal of Nursing Education, 58(2), 59–66.

https://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20190122-01

Theves, S., Fernández, G., & Doeller, C. F. (2019). The hippocampus encodes distances in

multidimensional feature space. Current Biology, 29(7), 1226–1231.e3.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.02.035

Medin, D. L., & Smith, E. E. (1984). Concepts and concept formation. Annual Review of

Psychology, 35, 113–138. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.35.020184.000553

Wrobel, S. (1994). The psychology of concepts and concept formation. In Concept Formation

and Knowledge Revision (pp. 19–44). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2317-5_2