Trial order affects cue interaction in contingency judgment.
نویسنده
چکیده
Recent research on contingency judgment indicates that the judged predictiveness of a cue is dependent on the predictive strengths of other cues. Two classes of models correctly predict such cue interaction: associative models and statistical models. However, these models differ in their predictions about the effect of trial order on cue interaction. In five experiments reported here, college students viewed trial-by-trial data regarding several medical symptoms and a disease, judging the predictive strength of each symptom with respect to the disease. The results indicate that trial order influences the manner in which cues interact, but that neither the associative nor the statistical models can fully account for the data pattern. A possible variation of an associative account is discussed.
منابع مشابه
Cue-interaction effects in contingency judgments using the streamed-trial procedure.
The authors previously described a procedure that permits rapid, multiple within-participant assessments of the contingency between a cue and an outcome (the "streamed-trial" procedure, Crump, Hannah, Allan, & Hord, 2007). In the present experiments, the authors modified this procedure to investigate cue-interaction effects, replicating conventional findings in both the one- and two-phase block...
متن کاملThe criterion-calibration model of cue interaction in contingency judgments.
Siegel, Allan, Hannah, and Crump (2009) demonstrated that cue interaction effects in human contingency judgments reflect processing that occurs after the acquisition of information. This finding is in conflict with a broad class of theories. We present a new postacquisition model, the criterion-calibration model, that describes cue interaction effects as involving shifts in a report criterion. ...
متن کاملMS# PBR-BR-10-126-R2 Running head: OUTCOME PREDICTION AND CAUSAL JUDGMENT IN PRESS: PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW (Oct. 2010) Contrasting cue-density effects in causal and prediction judgments
Many theories of contingency learning assume (either explicitly or implicitly) that predicting whether an outcome will occur should be easier than making a causal judgment. Previous research suggests that outcome predictions would depart from normative standards less often than causal judgments, which is consistent with the idea that the latter are based on more numerous and complex processes. ...
متن کاملCue interaction and judgments of causality: contributions of causal and associative processes.
In four experiments, the predictions made by causal model theory and the Rescorla-Wagner model were tested by using a cue interaction paradigm that measures the relative response to a given event based on the influence or salience of an alternative event. Experiments 1 and 2 uncorrelated two variables that have typically been confounded in the literature (causal order and the number of cues and...
متن کاملNonnormative discounting: there is more to cue interaction effects than controlling for alternative causes.
Several experiments on human causal reasoning have demonstrated "discounting"--that the presence of a strong alternative cause may decrease the perceived efficacy of a moderate target cause. Some, but not all, of these effects have been shown to be attributable to subjects' use of conditional rather than unconditional contingencies (i.e., subjects control for alternative causes). We review expe...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition
دوره 17 5 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 1991