Literature DB >> 16095045

Contiguity and the outcome density bias in action-outcome contingency judgements.

Frédéric Vallée-Tourangeau1, Robin A Murphy, A G Baker.   

Abstract

In cause-outcome contingency judgement tasks, judgements often reflect the actual contingency but are also influenced by the overall probability of the outcome, P(O). Action-outcome instrumental learning tasks can foster a pattern in which judgements of positive contingencies become less positive as P(O) increases. Variable contiguity between the action and the outcome may produce this bias. Experiment 1 recorded judgements of positive contingencies that were largely uninfluenced by P(O) using an immediate contiguity procedure. Experiment 2 directly compared variable versus constant contiguity. The predicted interaction between contiguity and P(O) was observed for positive contingencies. These results stress the sensitivity of the causal learning mechanism to temporal contiguity.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16095045     DOI: 10.1080/02724990444000104

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


  10 in total

1.  Interactive effects of the probability of the cue and the probability of the outcome on the overestimation of null contingency.

Authors:  Fernando Blanco; Helena Matute; Miguel A Vadillo
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Causing time: Evaluating causal changes to the when rather than the whether of an outcome.

Authors:  W James Greville; Marc J Buehner; Mark K Johansen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-02

3.  The Neural Bases of Action-Outcome Learning in Humans.

Authors:  Richard W Morris; Amir Dezfouli; Kristi R Griffiths; Mike E Le Pelley; Bernard W Balleine
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 6.709

4.  Benefiting from trial spacing without the cost of prolonged training: Frequency, not duration, of trials with absent stimuli enhances perceived contingency.

Authors:  Santiago Castiello; Ralph R Miller; James E Witnauer; Doriann M Alcaide; Ethan Fung; Riddhi J Pitliya; Dyedra K C Morrissey; Robin A Murphy
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2022-01-06

5.  When does stress help or harm? The effects of stress controllability and subjective stress response on stroop performance.

Authors:  Roselinde K Henderson; Hannah R Snyder; Tina Gupta; Marie T Banich
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-06-07

6.  Exploring the factors that encourage the illusions of control: the case of preventive illusions.

Authors:  Fernando Blanco; Helena Matute
Journal:  Exp Psychol       Date:  2015

7.  Context and time in causal learning: contingency and mood dependent effects.

Authors:  Rachel M Msetfi; Caroline Wade; Robin A Murphy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Implementation and assessment of an intervention to debias adolescents against causal illusions.

Authors:  Itxaso Barberia; Fernando Blanco; Carmelo P Cubillas; Helena Matute
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Causal illusions in children when the outcome is frequent.

Authors:  María Manuela Moreno-Fernández; Fernando Blanco; Helena Matute
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Causal illusions in the classroom: how the distribution of student outcomes can promote false instructional beliefs.

Authors:  Kit S Double; Julie Y L Chow; Evan J Livesey; Therese N Hopfenbeck
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2020-08-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.