Literature DB >> 23527948

Is it better to select or to receive? Learning via active and passive hypothesis testing.

Douglas B Markant1, Todd M Gureckis1.   

Abstract

People can test hypotheses through either selection or reception. In a selection task, the learner actively chooses observations to test his or her beliefs, whereas in reception tasks data are passively encountered. People routinely use both forms of testing in everyday life, but the critical psychological differences between selection and reception learning remain poorly understood. One hypothesis is that selection learning improves learning performance by enhancing generic cognitive processes related to motivation, attention, and engagement. Alternatively, we suggest that differences between these 2 learning modes derives from a hypothesis-dependent sampling bias that is introduced when a person collects data to test his or her own individual hypothesis. Drawing on influential models of sequential hypothesis-testing behavior, we show that such a bias (a) can lead to the collection of data that facilitates learning compared with reception learning and (b) can be more effective than observing the selections of another person. We then report a novel experiment based on a popular category learning paradigm that compares reception and selection learning. We additionally compare selection learners to a set of "yoked" participants who viewed the exact same sequence of observations under reception conditions. The results revealed systematic differences in performance that depended on the learner's role in collecting information and the abstract structure of the problem.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23527948     DOI: 10.1037/a0032108

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


  19 in total

1.  Brief cognitive training interventions in young adulthood promote long-term resilience to drug-seeking behavior.

Authors:  Josiah R Boivin; Denise M Piscopo; Linda Wilbrecht
Journal:  Neuropharmacology       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 5.250

2.  Theoretical perspectives on active sensing.

Authors:  Daniel M Wolpert; Máté Lengyel; Scott Cheng-Hsin Yang
Journal:  Curr Opin Behav Sci       Date:  2018-10

3.  Word learning from a tablet app: Toddlers perform better in a passive context.

Authors:  Lena Ackermann; Chang Huan Lo; Nivedita Mani; Julien Mayor
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Monitoring the ebb and flow of attention: Does controlling the onset of stimuli during encoding enhance memory?

Authors:  Trisha N Patel; Mark Steyvers; Aaron S Benjamin
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-05

Review 5.  Exploration versus exploitation in space, mind, and society.

Authors:  Thomas T Hills; Peter M Todd; David Lazer; A David Redish; Iain D Couzin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 20.229

6.  Sampling to learn words: Adults and children sample words that reduce referential ambiguity.

Authors:  Martin Zettersten; Jenny R Saffran
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2020-12-07

7.  Information sampling behavior with explicit sampling costs.

Authors:  Mordechai Z Juni; Todd M Gureckis; Laurence T Maloney
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2016-07

8.  Deconstructing the effect of self-directed study on episodic memory.

Authors:  Douglas Markant; Sarah DuBrow; Lila Davachi; Todd M Gureckis
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-11

Review 9.  Asking the right questions about the psychology of human inquiry: Nine open challenges.

Authors:  Anna Coenen; Jonathan D Nelson; Todd M Gureckis
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2019-10

10.  Learning from other minds: An optimistic critique of reinforcement learning models of social learning.

Authors:  Natalia Vélez; Hyowon Gweon
Journal:  Curr Opin Behav Sci       Date:  2021-03-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.