Literature DB >> 21500927

Effects of concurrent load on feature- and rule-based generalization in human contingency learning.

Andy J Wills1, Steven Graham, Zhisheng Koh, Ian P L McLaren, Matthew D Rolland.   

Abstract

The effect of concurrent load on generalization performance in human contingency learning was examined in 2 experiments that employed the combined positive and negative patterning procedure of Shanks and Darby (1998). In Experiment 1, we tested 32 undergraduates and found that participants who were trained and tested under full attention showed generalization consistent with the application of an opposites rule (i.e., single cues signal the opposite outcome to their compound), whereas participants trained and tested under a concurrent cognitive load showed generalization consistent with surface similarity. In Experiment 2, we replicated the effect with 148 undergraduates and provided evidence that it was the presence of concurrent load during training, rather than during testing, that was critical. Implications for associative, inferential, and dual-process accounts of human learning are discussed. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21500927     DOI: 10.1037/a0023120

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process        ISSN: 0097-7403


  9 in total

Review 1.  Hearing hooves, thinking zebras: A review of the inverse base-rate effect.

Authors:  Hilary J Don; Darrell A Worthy; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-02-10

2.  Rule abstraction, model-based choice, and cognitive reflection.

Authors:  Hilary J Don; Micah B Goldwater; A Ross Otto; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-10

3.  Feature- versus rule-based generalization in rats, pigeons and humans.

Authors:  Elisa Maes; Guido De Filippo; Angus B Inkster; Stephen E G Lea; Jan De Houwer; Rudi D'Hooge; Tom Beckers; Andy J Wills
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2015-07-19       Impact factor: 3.084

Review 4.  Accounting for individual differences in human associative learning.

Authors:  Nicola C Byrom
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-09-04

5.  Sampling capacity underlies individual differences in human associative learning.

Authors:  Nicola C Byrom; Robin A Murphy
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Anim Learn Cogn       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.478

6.  Three Ways That Non-associative Knowledge May Affect Associative Learning Processes.

Authors:  Anna Thorwart; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2016-12-27

7.  Individual Difference Factors in the Learning and Transfer of Patterning Discriminations.

Authors:  Elisa Maes; Elias Vanderoost; Rudi D'Hooge; Jan De Houwer; Tom Beckers
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-07-28

8.  Can We Set Aside Previous Experience in a Familiar Causal Scenario?

Authors:  Justine K Greenaway; Evan J Livesey
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-11-30

9.  Memory Traces Diminished by Exercise Affect New Learning as Proactive Facilitation.

Authors:  Cuicui Li; Rena Li; Chenglin Zhou
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 4.677

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.