Signal detection analysis of contingency assessment: Associative interference and nonreinforcement impact cue-outcome contingency sensitivity, whereas cue density affects bias.
Signal detection analysis of contingency assessment: Associative interference and nonreinforcement impact cue-outcome contingency sensitivity, whereas cue density affects bias.
复制标题
应急评估的信号检测分析：联想干扰和非强化影响线索-结果应急敏感性，而线索密度影响偏差。
DOI：
10.1037/xan0000334
复制
发表时间：
2022-07
影响因子：
1.3
通讯作者：
Miller, Ralph R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jozefowiez, Jeremie;Urcelay, Gonzalo P.;Miller, Ralph R.
关键词：
在用于关联学习的信号检测理论（SDT）方法中，感知的（即，暗示和结果之间的偶然性（主观的）是从高斯分布中提取的随机变量。在序列的最后，参与者报告一个积极的线索-结果偶然性，前提是主观偶然性高于某个阈值。一些研究者认为主观列联分布的均值和阈值是由不同的变量控制的。目前的数据为这一说法提供了实证支持。在三个实验中，参与者被暴露在快速的试验流中，在试验结束时，他们必须指出目标结果O 1是否更有可能跟随目标线索X。在某些流中加入了两种干扰治疗，以提高参与者识别客观X-O 1偶然性的能力：干扰试验（X与无关结果O2配对），非强化试验（X单独呈现），加上对照试验（无关提示W与O2配对）。总的来说，干扰和非强化试验损害了参与者的敏感性，以SDT的测量的突发事件，但他们也通过线索密度效应增强了积极的突发事件的检测，与非强化试验更容易受到这种影响比干扰试验。这些结果是可以解释的，如果一个假设干扰和nonreinforced试验影响的平均关联强度分布，而线索密度影响的阈值。
In a signal detection theory (SDT) approach to associative learning, the perceived (i.e., subjective) contingency between a cue and an outcome is a random variable drawn from a Gaussian distribution. At the end of the sequence, participants report a positive cue-outcome contingency provided the subjective contingency is above some threshold. Some researchers have suggested that the mean of the subjective contingency distributions and the threshold are controlled by different variables. The present data provide empirical support for this claim. In three experiments, participants were exposed to rapid streams of trials at the end of which they had to indicate whether a target outcome O1 was more likely following a target cue X. Two interfering treatments were incorporated in some streams to impend participants’ ability to identify the objective X-O1 contingency: interference trials (X was paired with an irrelevant outcome O2), nonreinforced trials (X was presented alone), plus control trials (an irrelevant cue W was paired with O2). Overall, both interference and nonreinforced trials impaired participants’ sensitivity to the contingencies as measured by SDT’s , but they also enhanced detection of positive contingencies through a cue density effect, with nonreinforced trials being more susceptible to this effect than interference trials. These results are explicable if one assumes interference and nonreinforced trials impact the mean of the associative strength distribution, while the cue density influences the threshold.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
ALLAN, LG;JENKINS, HM
通讯作者：
JENKINS, HM
DOI：
10.1037/xge0000910
发表时间：
2022-01
期刊：
Journal of experimental psychology. General
影响因子：
--
作者：
Murphy RA;Witnauer JE;Castiello S;Tsvetkov A;Li A;Alcaide DM;Miller RR
通讯作者：
Miller RR
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Algina, J;Keselman, HJ
通讯作者：
Keselman, HJ
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Anwyl-Irvine, Alexander L.;Massonnie, Jessica;Evershed, Jo K.
通讯作者：
Evershed, Jo K.
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Hannah, Samuel D.;Allan, Lorraine G.
通讯作者：
Allan, Lorraine G.