Literature DB >> 12882379

Human causality judgments and response rates on DRL and DRH schedules of reinforcement.

Phil Reed1.   

Abstract

The effect of various relationships between a response (an investment made in the context of a game) and an outcome (a return on the investment) on judgments of the causal effectiveness of the response was examined. In Experiment 1, response rates and causal judgments were higher for a differential-reinforcement-of-high-rate (DRH) schedule relative to a variable-ratio (VR) schedule with the same probability of outcome following a response. Response rates were also higher for a DRH than for a variable-interval schedule matched for reinforcement rate. In Experiment 2, response rates and causal judgments were lower for a differential-reinforcement-of-low-rate schedule relative to a VR schedule with the same probability of outcome following a response. These results corroborate the view that schedules are a determinant of both response rates and causal judgments, and that few current theories of causal judgment explicitly predict this pattern of results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12882379     DOI: 10.3758/bf03195983

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Learn Behav        ISSN: 1543-4494            Impact factor:   1.986


  8 in total

1.  Schedules of reinforcement as determinants of human causality judgments and response rates.

Authors:  P Reed
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process       Date:  2001-07

2.  Effect of local context of responding on human judgment of causality.

Authors:  P Reed
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1992-09

Review 3.  Covariation in natural causal induction.

Authors:  P W Cheng; L R Novick
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Uninstructed human responding: sensitivity to ratio and interval contingencies.

Authors:  B A Matthews; E Shimoff; A C Catania; T Sagvolden
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1977-05       Impact factor: 2.468

5.  College students' responding to and rating of contingency relations: The role of temporal contiguity.

Authors:  E A Wasserman; D J Neunaber
Journal:  J Exp Anal Behav       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  Influence of the cost of responding on human causality judgments.

Authors:  P Reed
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1994-03

7.  Is human learning rational?

Authors:  D R Shanks
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1995-05

Review 8.  Human contingency judgments: rule based or associative?

Authors:  L G Allan
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 17.737

  8 in total
  2 in total

1.  Multiple determinants of transfer of evaluative function after conditioning with free-operant schedules of reinforcement.

Authors:  Charlotte Dack; Phil Reed; Louise McHugh
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Generalization of causal efficacy judgments after evaluative learning.

Authors:  Charlotte Dack; Louise McHugh; Phil Reed
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 1.986

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.