Literature DB >> 12881163

The relative effect of cue interaction.

Jason M Tangen1, Lorraine G Allan.   

Abstract

It is well established that two predictor cues (A and B) of a common outcome interact in that the judgement of the relationship between each cue and the outcome is influenced by the pairing history of the other cue with that outcome. For example, when the contingency of A with an outcome is weaker than the contingency of B with that outcome, the rating of the predictiveness of A is reduced relative to a situation where only A is paired with the outcome. One explanation of such cue interaction effects is provided by the conditional deltaP account. Spellman (1996b) derived a counterintuitive prediction of the conditional deltaP account where cue interaction should not occur under certain conditions even though a relatively poor predictor of an outcome is paired with a relatively good predictor of that outcome. However, Spellman (1996b) did not provide data to evaluate this prediction. In the present paper, we report the relevant data and show that they are consistent with the conditional deltaP account. A competing account of cue interaction is provided by the Rescorla-Wagner (RW) model. We derive the predictions of the RW model for the conditions specified by Spellman (1996b), and show that at asymptote the predictions of the RW model are identical to those of the conditional deltaP account.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12881163     DOI: 10.1080/02724990244000278

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol B        ISSN: 0272-4995


  7 in total

1.  Cue interaction and judgments of causality: contributions of causal and associative processes.

Authors:  Jason M Tangen; Lorraine G Allan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-01

2.  Temporal contiguity and contingency judgments: a Pavlovian analogue.

Authors:  Lorraine G Allan; Jason M Tangen; Robert Wood; Taral Shah
Journal:  Integr Physiol Behav Sci       Date:  2003 Jul-Sep

3.  A signal detection analysis of contingency data.

Authors:  Lorraine G Allan; Shepard Siegel; Jason M Tangen
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  Nonnormative discounting: there is more to cue interaction effects than controlling for alternative causes.

Authors:  Kelly M Goedert; Barbara A Spellman
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 1.986

5.  Accounting for occurrences: an explanation for some novel tendencies in causal judgment from contingency information.

Authors:  Peter A White
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-06

6.  The influence of the number of relevant causes on the processing of covariation information in causal reasoning.

Authors:  Kyungil Kim; Arthur B Markman; Tae Hoon Kim
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2016-06-17

7.  Self-construal and the processing of covariation information in causal reasoning.

Authors:  Kyungil Kim; Lisa R Grimm; Arthur B Markman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-09
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.