Very important for the psychology of classification is Eleanor Rosch’s notion of a prototype.

How is a prototype related to an archetype?

And how do these relate to a paradigm (as either Kuhn or Popper popularized)?

And how do these relate to the sorts of ‘types’ used in biological classification?

  • holotype – the single specimen or illustration that the author(s) clearly indicated to be the nomenclatural type of a name
  • lectotype – a specimen or illustration designated from the original material as the nomenclatural type when there was no holotype specified or the holotype has been lost or destroyed
  • isotype – a duplicate of the holotype
  • syntype – any specimen (or illustration) cited in the original description when there is no holotype, or any one of two or more specimens simultaneously designated as types
  • paratype – any specimen (or illustration) cited in the original description that is not the holotype nor an isotype, nor one of the syntypes. “The exact meaning of the term paratype when it is used in zoology is not the same as the meaning when it is used in botany. In both cases however, this term is used in conjunction with holotype.”
  • neotype – a specimen or illustration selected to serve as nomenclatural type if no material from the original description is available
  • epitype – a specimen or illustration selected to serve as an interpretative type, usually when another kind of type does not show the critical features needed for identification

…and yea, by the way, classifications in botany and zoology don’t even always use the same words.