Literature DB >> 18473655

The psychophysics of contingency assessment.

Lorraine G Allan1, Samuel D Hannah, Matthew J C Crump, Shepard Siegel.   

Abstract

The authors previously described a procedure that permits rapid, multiple within-participant evaluations of contingency assessment (the "streamed-trial" procedure, M. J. C. Crump, S. D. Hannah, L. G. Allan, & L. K. Hord, 2007). In the present experiments, they used the streamed-trial procedure, combined with the method of constant stimuli and a binary classification response, to assess the psychophysics of contingency assessment. This strategy provides a methodology for evaluating whether variations in contingency assessment reflect changes in the participant's sensitivity to the contingency or changes in the participant's response bias (or decision criterion). The sign of the contingency (positive or negative), outcome density, and imposition of an explicit payoff structure had little influence on sensitivity to contingencies but did influence the decision criterion. The authors discuss how a psychophysical analysis can provide a better understanding of findings in the literature such as mood and age effects on contingency assessment. They also discuss the relation between a psychophysical approach and an associative account of contingency assessment. (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18473655     DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.226

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  12 in total

1.  A test of Rescorla and Wagner's (1972) prediction of nonlinear effects in contingency learning.

Authors:  Joaquín Morís; Susana Carnero; Ignacio Loy
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.986

Review 2.  Temporal contingency.

Authors:  C R Gallistel; Andrew R Craig; Timothy A Shahan
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 1.777

3.  The criterion-calibration model of cue interaction in contingency judgments.

Authors:  Samuel D Hannah; Lorraine G Allan
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  The effects of problem content and scientific background on information search and the assessment and valuation of correlations.

Authors:  Shira Soffer; Yaakov Kareev
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2011-01

5.  Causal discounting in the presence of a stronger cue is due to bias.

Authors:  Jeffrey P Laux; Kelly M Goedert; Arthur B Markman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-04

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.  Time-scale-invariant information-theoretic contingencies in discrimination learning.

Authors:  Abigail Kalmbach; Eileen Chun; Kathleen Taylor; Charles R Gallistel; Peter D Balsam
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 2.478

8.  Unexpected downshifts in reward magnitude induce variation in human behavior.

Authors:  Greg Jensen; Patricia D Stokes; Anthea Paterniti; Peter D Balsam
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-04

9.  More frequent, shorter trials enhance acquisition in a training session: There is a free lunch!

Authors:  Robin A Murphy; James E Witnauer; Santiago Castiello; Anna Tsvetkov; Audrey Li; Doriann M Alcaide; Ralph R Miller
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2021-09-27

10.  Pathological gamblers are more vulnerable to the illusion of control in a standard associative learning task.

Authors:  Cristina Orgaz; Ana Estévez; Helena Matute
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-06-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.