Priming is not all bias: Commentary on Ratcliff and McKoon (1997)
Priming is not all bias: Commentary on Ratcliff and McKoon (1997)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0033-295x.106.3.582
复制
发表时间：
1999-07-01
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Bowers, JS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bowers, JS
R. Ratcliff和G. McKoon（1997）报告了一系列发现，他们声称这些发现与之前对长期启动的所有解释都不一致，包括(a)识别任务中的收益和成本模式暗示了对启动的偏见解释，(b)对启动的限制，使得只有在强制选择任务中的替代方案相似时才能获得收益和成本。基于这些和相关的发现，Ratcliff和McKoon发展了一个视觉词启动的偏见理论，并在一个数学模型中实现。然而，本文表明，他们的实证研究结果是模棱两可的，可以在更传统的框架内更简洁地解释。此外，有8项研究直接与他们的模型相矛盾。基于这些和相关的发现，我们认为启动最好被理解为感知系统中学习的副产品，其主要功能是对输入进行分类。
R. Ratcliff and G. McKoon (1997) reported a set of findings they claim is inconsistent with all prior accounts of long-term priming, including (a) a pattern of benefits and costs in an identification task suggestive of a bias interpretation of priming and (b) a restriction on priming such that benefits and costs are obtained only when the alternatives in the forced-choice task are similar. On the basis of these and related findings, Ratcliff and McKoon developed a bias theory of visual word priming that is implemented in a mathematical model. However, the present article shows that their empirical findings are ambiguous and can be explained more parsimoniously within more traditional frameworks. Furthermore, 8 studies are reported that directly contradict their model. On the basis of these and related findings, it is argued that priming is best understood as a by-product of learning within perceptual systems whose main function is to categorize inputs.