Literature DB >> 35819717

A computational process-tracing method for measuring people's planning strategies and how they change over time.

Yash Raj Jain1,2, Frederick Callaway3, Thomas L Griffiths3, Peter Dayan4, Ruiqi He5, Paul M Krueger6, Falk Lieder5.   

Abstract

One of the most unique and impressive feats of the human mind is its ability to discover and continuously refine its own cognitive strategies. Elucidating the underlying learning and adaptation mechanisms is very difficult because changes in cognitive strategies are not directly observable. One important domain in which strategies and mechanisms are studied is planning. To enable researchers to uncover how people learn how to plan, we offer a tutorial introduction to a recently developed process-tracing paradigm along with a new computational method for measuring the nature and development of a person's planning strategies from the resulting process-tracing data. Our method allows researchers to reveal experience-driven changes in people's choice of individual planning operations, planning strategies, strategy types, and the relative contributions of different decision systems. We validate our method on simulated and empirical data. On simulated data, its inferences about the strategies and the relative influence of different decision systems are accurate. When evaluated on human data generated using our process-tracing paradigm, our computational method correctly detects the plasticity-enhancing effect of feedback and the effect of the structure of the environment on people's planning strategies. Together, these methods can be used to investigate the mechanisms of cognitive plasticity and to elucidate how people acquire complex cognitive skills such as planning and problem-solving. Importantly, our methods can also be used to measure individual differences in cognitive plasticity and examine how different types (pedagogical) interventions affect the acquisition of cognitive skills.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive plasticity; Computational methods; Decision-making; Individual differences; Learning; Panning; Process-tracing

Year:  2022        PMID: 35819717     DOI: 10.3758/s13428-022-01789-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  1 in total

1.  Strategy selection as rational metareasoning.

Authors:  Falk Lieder; Thomas L Griffiths
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 8.934

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.